The necropolis of Cyrene. Two hundred years of exploration 9788882653392

Citation preview

CONTENTS

Acknowledgements, Copyright and The Archives Preface.

ee

ees

ΝΣ

Page n

es

ΝΣ

Introduction and Architectural Terms

13

isses

.

.

19

CHAPTERI PREVIOUS EXPLORATIONS 1.0 120 130 140

Introduction... Explorers Antiquarians Archaeologists

EM " ΝΡ MM

. .

᾿

i

e

2 2 36 45

CHAPTERIT ROWE'S NECROPOLIS STUDIES ILLO — TombSudes

eee

enn

99

Northern ILLI Rowe's Sondage Trenches 1-3, Tombs M. 1,17. e 121 Rowe's Tomb M, 7; Cassels N.241 esse eee 113.1 Rowe's Tomb M. 16; CasselsN. 13, N. 10. Π41 Cassel'sTombsN.9-N.2 .. . . s es IIS1 Rowes Tomb M. 15; Cassels N. 401, N. 34, N. 1 ss : TL6.1 Rowe's Tomb M.8; Cassels N.57 . . . . MM ILL Rowes Tomb M.3, N. 198A, B; Cassels N. 197-198 eee IL&1 Rowe's Tombs M.6, M. 2, CasselsN. 201-202 . ον Eastern. 1191 Rowe's Tomb E. 161-A, E. 161; Cassels E. 160-161 TL10.1 Rowe's Tomb Μ. 5; Cassels E. 19 a... ILILI — Rowe's Tomb M. 4, Cassels E. 174 . Southern TL12.1 — Rowe's Tombs M. 9-M. 13; Cassels S. 80-5. 85

1LD1 — RowesTombM. M;Cascs$.77

.....

ee

ME

MN

"

100 1 105 108 in 120 2 126

e

E .

.

129 136 138 140

16

CHAPTER II ROWE'S NECROPOLIS EXCAVATION IILLO

24

Tomb Studies

Rock-cut Tombs N. 83 Area ILL] TombN.8 . M21 TombN. 83 bis. ΠΙ31 TombN.83-BF .. IIA1 Tomb N. 83-BF bis TILS1 Ν. 85 Rock-cut Graves Upper Group TL6.1 Enclosure Ν. 83-S TH7.1 Endosure N. 83-U 181 N.83 Rock-cut Graves Lower Group II91 EncosureN. 83-W IILIO.1 — EndosureN. 83-BK —À IILILI — Sarcophagus Group N. 83-BN - N. 83-BU

245 248 249 250 22 252 253 255 256 258 265

Rock-cut Tombs N. 82 Area IILI21 TombN.82 TIL13.1. Enclosure N. 82-23, IILILI — Endosure N. 82-24 IILIAI — Endosure N. 82-1

264 266 267 268

Rock-cut IILI&1 ILI.1 IIIS1 IILIJ1 1IL20.1 IIL2L1 1221 1123.1 IIL241 1125.1

269 zu 22 273 214 215 am 278 280 281

Tombs N. 81 Area — TombsN.81,N.81 bis TombN.81-A. . TombN.8LO. . Built Tomb N.77 — Upper Enclosure N. 81-B Lower Enclosure N. 81-B Enclosure N. 81-BB Enclosure N. 81-KK Enclosure N.81-AB . . . — Peripheral GroupN. 81. . CHAPTERIV ROCK-CUT TOMB MORPHOLOGY

1V.00 1V.0.1 1V02 1V.03

Introduction Necropolis morphology Classification . Formation and development

Rock-cut Tombs IVO Configurations A IV.L1 — Typs AB Portico chamber. . 1V.12 TypesC-D Facade sarcophagus chamber 1V13 — TypsET Facade loculus IV14 — Τγρες 6:1 Squarechamberloculus 1V15 — TypesK-M Wide chamber loculus IV16 — TypesN-O Long-galeried oculus 1V17 — TypesP-R — Poricoed-sepulchre

327 328 331 332 333 335 338 342 345 347 349 352

IV.L8 — TypesS-T — Arcaded hypogeum - triclinium recesses IV.L9 TypesU-V Long-wide antechamber cubiculum IVLIO Types W-X — Adapted cubiculum - formae. CHAPTER V BUILT TOMB MORPHOLOGY

Rectangular Built Tombs VO Configurations Val Types AC Vi2 TypeD VaA3 Type. V4 TypesF-G V5 Type

Double compartment (temple) . Stepped mastabas Single compartment (shrine). . Single compartment (temple) Podium compartment

Square Built Tombs V20 Configurations . . V2.1 Types A-C Mausoleum and monuments V22 TypesD-F _Burial precincts and plots 23 — TyeGH Definedareas ....... Circular Built Tombs V3.0 Configurations. V3.1 Types A-B — V3.2 TypesC-D V33 TypeE ὠ V34 — TypeF

ee Burial plots (orthostat) Burial plots (socle and podium) . ἜΒοιήεὶ plot (crepidoma) Roofed tumulus (crepidoma)

Sarcophagi

V4.0 VA V42 V43 V44 VAS

—— Configurations — Block-cut —— Rodccut Island e — Orthostat-built — Blockcut cremation caskets

Furnishings V5.0 Statuary, stela, gravestones and other furnishings. V5.1 Statuary on tombs . . V52 Ναεκοὶ ον V53 Statuary on sarcophagi Vél Pillar stlai V6.2 Block stelai e V.63 — Stelai on sarcophagi VJA —— Monuments-gravestones VJ2 Memorials 173 — Gravestones Vl Cineraria V.82 — Ossuarics : V83 Model burial furniture V84 —— Votives .

an 413 413 414 415 415 416 4 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 427 429 430 430

CHAPTER VI DISCUSSION Cyrenaica and Marmarica VLLO Introduction VELL VIL2 Marmarica

461 462 466

Eastern VI20 VI21 VI22 M23 VI24 VI25 VI26

467 468 468 469 469 469 469

Greeks Introduction — Lyca — Karia — Lydi. — Phrygia — Paphlagonia — Cappadocia .

Greek Islands V13.0 Introduction VI31 Cyprus VI32 — Rhodes VI33 Samos VI34 — Cree

470 470 470 4n 4n

Mainland Greece. VLAO Introduction VIAI Attica VIA2 Thessaly VIA3.— Macedonia . VEA4 — Peopennese . -

42 42 415 413 413

Western Greeks VI5.0 Introduction . VISA alia VI52 — Siclia

414 414 45

Conclusion VL6O — Synopsis

45

CHAPTER VII CATALOGUE OF BURIAL ACCOUTREMENTS VILOO

Introduction .

Architectural Elements VILLO — Columnsand pillars . VIL20 — Entablatures i VIL3O — Entrances and doorslabs

50

VILAO — Murals

50 504 506 508

Burial Furniture. VILSO — Klinai VIL6.0 ^ Tables

513 514

VIL7.0 — Niches VILO — Tomb inscriptions Burial Monuments VILS0 — Sii

VILI0.0

Sockets. .

VILILO

Sarcophagus inscriptions

.

Burial Practice VIL12.0 Tomb inhumations .. VIL13.0 — Tomb and enclosure cremations . VILIAO — Rock-cut grave inhumations

VILIS

| Orchostat built cists and isodomic-builti

VILIGO — Blockcut sarcophagi VILILO — Rodcut sarcophagi VWILISO — Votive deposits List of Photographic Sources. . Abbreviations. Bibliography .

‘The Catalogue of Artifacts, with its Abbreviations and Bibliography, appears separately.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

My thanks are due to those who co-operated by giving help, advice and general support. Sponsors: Dr. Joyce Reynolds; Prof. Donald White ‘Tae Socıery ror LißyaN STUDIES COMMITTEE who provided travelling expenses for this research 1988-1992, 1994-1995 and 1998. PUBLISHERS "L'ERMA' DI BRETSCHNEIDER and the Giuria Scientifica.

who awarded me the 11th Bretschneider Premio 2002 icola Bonacasa; Francesco Buranelli; Prof. Giovanni Colonna; Domenico Faccenna; Prof. Francesca ini; Pietro Giovanni Guzzo; Eugenio La Rocca; Dieter Mertens; Prof. Letizia Pani Ermini; André Vauchez; Andrew Wallace Hadrill. The editorial team: Dr. Roberto Marcucci; Annie Olsen; Giovanni Portieri. ‘Tue SociaLisT PEOPLE'S LIBYAN ARAB REPUBLIC JAMAHIRIYA

Department of Antiquities Tripoli: Dr.Ali Khedoury for permission to study Rowe's material in the Jamahiriya Museum; Abdallah Ahmed Abdallah al Mahmoudi; Juma Garsa; Ramadan Gedidah Benghazi: Ibrahim Twahni; Ali Letrek Cyrene: Dr.Fadel Ali Mohamed for permission to study Rowe's material and excavations; Hadj Breyck Attiyah εἰ Jitoury; Abdulhamid Abdussaid; Abdulkader al Muzzeini; Ramadan al Gwaider; Saleh Wanis; Daoud Flalag; Ali Hassuna; Ahmed Hassan; Younis Hassan; Mohamed Musa; Mohammed Ali Abd Sharet; Mahmoud; Abolgasim Abdulhamed; Abdulsheem Saleh Saed Mabruk Shariff; Faraj Abdul-Atti Hamed; Naser Said Abdul Jalil; Issa Na’as; Babir Jibrin Apollonia: Had Fadlallah Abdussalam Tolmeita: Abdussalam Bazama Shahat landowners: Abderrahim Mohammed Larbid; Ali Mahmoudy Mohammed Rowe's excavation workmen: The Hasa tribe of Cyrenaica; Jumaa al Hawal; Husein Bu Hjezha; Mohammed Ali; Ali Basheer; Mustafa Abd.rabbah; Mahmud Abd-Al-Malik; Hamad; Arcef ash-Shareef; Abd-Al-’Ati Hamid; Tbraheem la Khwani; Majeed Shagluf, Muhammed Bu Tbligiyah; Salch Mjawer; Ali Latrik; Faraj Abd-Allah Museums: British Museum: Conservation: Fleur Shearman Egyptian Antiquities: Maurice Bierbrier; Alan Spencer Greek and Roman

Antiquities: Dr.Susan Walker; Dr.Donald Bailey; Dr.Jan Jenkins; Dr.Lucilla Burn; Paul Roberts; Lloyd Gallimore; Emma Cox; Elizabeth Cummings; Kim Overend; Kenneth Evans; Susan Smith; Valerie Smith; Richard Abdy; Janet McNeil, Paul Higgs, Roger Flint, Bernard Jackson Medieval and Later: Neil Stratford; John Cherry; Paul and Lisa Reardon; Peter Stringer; Christine Bard; Barry Ager Prehistoric and RomanoBritish Antiquities: Karen Hughes Western Asiatic Antiquities: Annie Searight Central Archives: Janet Wallace; Christopher Date; Cathleen Marsh; Stephen Curry Ashmolean: Prof. Sir John Boardman; Dr.Don-

12 2a Kurtz; Michael Vickers Fitzwilliam: Prof. Ted Buttrey Great Orme Copper Mine: Frank Jowett GraecoRoman Museum, Alexandria: Madame Doria; Laila Halim; Osman Mohammed; Farallah Osman Mohammed Manchester: Dr.John Prag; T. Burton Brown National Museum of Wales: Dr.Mary Seddon National Museums of Scotland: Dr.Elizabeth Goring UNIVERSITIES:

Aberdeen: Prof. John Gray Benghazi: Faraj Elrashedy Birmingham: Prof. Richard Tomlinson Chieti Prof.ssa Emanuela Fabricotti; Dr. Oliva Menozzi; Luca Cherstich; Igor Cherstich; Eugenio di Valerio; Angela Cinalli Firenze: Prof, Luigi Beschi Leicester: Dr.David Mattingley; Dr.Graham Morgan Liverpool: DrS.RSnape; Pat Winker London: David Dixon King’s College, London: Dr.-Hafed Walda Royal Holloway and Bedford New College, London: Prof. John Healy Manchester: Prof. Barri Jones; Charles Burney; Prof. Anthony Birley; Dr.Derek Buttle; W.C. Brice; Sheila Ord; Sylvia Hazlehurst; Pat Faulkner; Keith Maude; John Riley; Dr.Paul Holder; Albert Curtis; Mark Woolstencroft Newcastle: Prof. Charles Daniels; John Dore; Sandra Rowntree College of New Paltz: Prof. Jaimee Uhlenbrock Oberlin College, Ol Dr Susan Kane Oxford: DrJohn Lloyd; Dimitri Plantzos Pennsylvania: Prof. Donald White; Alessandro Pezzati; David Conwell Sorbonne: Prof. André Laronde; Prof Jean-Jacques Maffre Swansea: Dr.David Gill Urbino: Prof. Sandro Stucchi; Prof. Lidiano Bacchielli Hugh Chapman, Dai Morgan-Evans, E.B. Nurse, Donald Imber Canterbury Archaeological Trust: Paul Bennett British School at Athens: Guy Sanders; Amalia Kakissis Deutsches Archiiologisches Institut, Rome: Dr. Sylvia Dicbner British School in Rome: Geraldine Wellington, Valerie Scott Cyprus American Archaeological Research Institute: G.RH. Wright Inspectorate of Ancient Monuments: Marjorie Hutchinson; Barry Knight; David Sherlock Egyptian Antiquities Department: Ess. Osman El Hamhmi

COPYRIGHT

Copyright of this text and the illustrations rests with the author and ‘L’Erma’ di Bretschneider. ‘THE ARCHIVES

Documentation which has been presented to me has been invaluable in providing contemporary evidence in Chapters II and III. The reference applicable to each set of documents includes the name of the donor, without whose foresight they would not have survived. These are listed under Personal Archives, and are intended eventually to be lodged in the following institutions: Liverpool University, School of Archaeology, Classics and Oriental Studies for Rowe's original site records and photographs, in order to complete the collection already held there, referred to here as the ‘Fairman.Arch’; Newcastle University, Department of Archaeology for personal archives, including my personal field notes, the new Register Catalogue and Record Sheets. Selected records relevant to Manchester Museum have been lodged there. Copies of the earlier versions of my work, on which this manuscript is based, are held in Cyrene Museum. Later draft copies, with corrections, will be found in Cyrene, in Tripoli, in the World Heritage Centre at UNESCO, Paris and in the offices of ‘L’Erma’ di Bretschneider in Rome, where the present edition is intended for publication. My original drawings are intended to be deposited with Chieti University, Dipartimento Scienze dell Antichita,

PREFACE

In 1981, when I was employed as an archaeological illustrator at Ancient Monuments for England, I had the opportunity to work at Cyrene for seven weeks for Prof. Donald White of Pennsylvania University, recording architectural fragments discovered during excavation of the Demeter Sanctuary. It was just over a decade since the revolution, when Libya was still developing its identity within a changing world. New Shahat then consisted of one thoroughfare, with a one petrol station situated at the Derna-Beida crossroads in the Southern Necropolis. While I was there, I witnessed the early stages of destruction of Cyrene’s necropolis by the building of a motorway from Apollonia to New Shahat, which destroyed large sections of the ancient Apollonia road and was said to have obliterated large numbers of unrecorded tombs as it approached Cyrene. It threatened the Northern Necropolis, but the Antiquities Department managed to get it diverted away from the most spectacular tombs by the cutting of an artificial cleft in the scarp of the hills to take the road through to New Shahat. Then followed the dark period, turbulent times during which major destruction of the necropolis occurred. I was able to return in 1988 with Prof. Barri Jones of Manchester University on a sponsored project to study the excavations of Alan Rowe in the 1950s, and was confronted with the new town of Shahat which had been built on the Southern and Eastern Necropolis. What I had seen in this area seven years previously had been wiped away without trace and covered by a modern housing development. During the following decade I had to study Rowe's material and excavated tombs while becoming increasingly aware that I was in a nightmare situation where one of Libya's greatest treasures from the ancient world was being destroyed, melting into oblivion before my eyes. My draughtsmanship skills were needed, as I knew that it was necessary to properly record the tombs which were rapidly disappearing like a desert mirage. The emphasis of my project had to change dramatically to include tombs which were under threat of destruction, punctuated since 1998 by an increase in tomb-robbing and vandalism, which is damaging so many of the surviving tombs. In March 2002 two aniconic halffigures, unprovenanced but obviously of Cyrenean origin, appeared secretly on the New York antiques market, and a stele fragment, also unprovenanced but with the Cyrene hallmark, is to feature in a Brussels antiques fair. Black-glazed and red figure ceramics and terracotta figurines, once removed from the country, disappear in the same way. This nightmare has been the driving force for my work, and also my own personal loyalty to the Antiquities Department in Cyrene, where I have always encountered the greatest assistance, support, hospitality and understanding. As the Controller said to me: “μὰ ABMs Co IS "The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on

14 New RESEARCH

In 1983 I had bought Rowe's two books on his excavations in Cyrene, and came to the conclusion that I could rework the report by studying the material in Manchester. I approached Dr. Joyce Reynolds at a meeting of the Society for Libyan Studies to ask if, in het opinion, it was ‘worth doing, and she agreed that it was. The following year I studied and drew the exchange items at Manchester, and on completion Dr. John Prag suggested that I should do the rest of the material in Cyrene, with the support of Prof. Barri Jones, who said: ‘If you're going to do Alan Rowe, do it well’, which has been my motto. At that time no written archaeological records had been found other than David Dixon’s personal notes and the edited Object Register transcribed in Rowe II. My 1989 campaign was therefore to record all surviving artifacts to give a visual record, and to search for associated finds labels to enable the Register to be rebuilt, by filling the gaps in the assemblages, before studying the tombs and sarcophagi surveyed and excavated by Rowe: I worked in Cyrene, in the Museum and on the necropolis, for eighty-eight days. From 1989-1992 I studied all the burial artifacts in the Cyrene Museum reserve collections from Rowe’s 1955-1957 campaigns? In 1994 additional pieces from the 1956 campaign were studied in Apollo-

nia Museum, called here ‘Sousa materia? ? The material from the 1952 campaign, moved to a new store in 1955, is still untraced, together with Burton Brown’s 1947 burial artifacts.‘ During this period I made enquiries about Rowe’s duplicate Object Register mentioned by Dixon, but without success. This led to the programme of searching for original site labels, a large number of which were found in 1991 by clearing fallen plaster and sweeping away pigeon and rat droppings on the floor of an abandoned storeroom above the old Sculpture Gallery. A scatter of handwritten exhibition labels revealed that there had been a temporary display in the museum at the close of the 1957 campaign? In my 1994-1995 fieldwork I resurveyed and studied more fully all the tombs and sarcophagi where Rowe had been involved, noticing that he had clean methods of excavation, and care had been taken to backfill Tombs E.19, E.161 and 5.81 with stones, which was one of the stipulations laid down in the contracts, but Tomb 8.80 was the exception to this rule, and Cassels two years later was uncertain whether it had been dug by Rowe (Fig. 157). By chance, some of the original archaeological field records were found in May 1996, which led to others in Liverpool and are outlined more fully below. These necessitated a major revision of the text as it stood at that time by the inclusion of new material from Rowe's field notebooks. I went in February 1998 to the Acropolis Museum in Athens to study more closely the remains of the archaic Doric entablatures, and visited a small surviving part of the Athenian Necropolis at Kerameikos for comparison of burial practices relating to the large quantity of Attic artifacts found in Rowe's excavations, I visited the Sanctuary of Demeter at Eleusis to study the two comparative “Thea’ inscriptions found there at the Plutonium which correspond to the only other known example scratched on the polos of Rowe's artifact M.1185 (Fig. 411). In April Rowe's personal secretary, Mrs Sheila Ord, met John Prag with documentation relating to the 1958 exchange exhibition held in the present Students’ Room of Manchester Museum. In the following month I re? Thom (1994), 110-115 Figs. 7.9. ? Rowe's Object Register items M. 175-364, M. 599-801, M. 823-1334. ? Rowe's Object Register items M. 365-598, M. 802-822. * Rowe's Object Register itemsM. 1-174. ? Display labels were written out in biro by Alan Rowe on pieces torn from a reporter's pad, with provisional descriptions, but without the Object Register number. On 20th May 2000 in the Controller’ office I was asked by Abdulkader εἰ Muzeiny: Have you seen this list? "What lit?” I replied, and was presented with a letter book containing, among other things, 14 numbered folded pages comprising the unbound master copy of Rowe's 1955 Object Register. This in volved me, at a late stage, in text adjustments to Chapter II and alterations to the Catalogue of Artifacts

15

turned to Cyrene for twenty-three days, and took the opportunity to study more fully Rowe's tombs in the context of the Northern Necropolis. This clarified many anomalies which I realised existed. T also spent five days in Alexandria, concentrating on the tomb morphology and the catacomb of Köm el-Shukafa which Rowe had cleared and consolidated. In April 1999 I went to the island of Rhodes and spent some time in studing the tomb morphology and artifacts in the Archaeological Museum. However, that year saw two tragic losses, that of my external examiner John Lloyd, followed within six weeks by my supervisor Professor Barri Jones, two men who, with the Society for Libyan Studies, were the original sponsors of my work. After this there was an abortive attempt to obtain a visa for a September return to Cyrene. Since writing the above, I was able to return to Cyrene in May 2000. During my research T was by chance confronted by fourteen pages of Rowe’s 1955 campaign Object Register, and a recently robbed structure by Rowe's Tomb M.15 which was important by revealing a naiskos in situ on its roof (Fig. 100). The building of a new slip road around New Shahat had put Tomb $.359 under threat of destruction (Fig.236), and as a result of a request by the Antiquities Department had to be recorded at short notice in the midst of the pounding, reverberating tumult of hell itself from the developers'steel chariots of destruction above and around, which were consuming and obliterating all before them for ever. This new road is only a stone’s throw from Rowe’s Tombs M.9-14 (Figs. 150, 163). At this very late stage in my work I decided to include these pieces of information, which entailed alterations to the already completed illustrations and accompanying text. My most recent visit to Cyrene was in October 2002, when a great escalation in tombrobbing was noticed, with mechanical diggers doing some of the work, and hitherto undisturbed tombs have been cleared of their contents. Each time a visit is made to Cyrene a further part of the necropolis is being destroyed without being recorded, and this presents me with the dilemma of whether it is more important to record, or to ignore new information and submit a limited mockery of the true picture (Figs. 47, 207). Alan Rowe's flawed archaeological work fifty years ago, for which he was cruelly criticised by the academic fraternity, nevertheless opened the door for further research which, if undertaken, would have saved the necropolis from its demise. Tragically, no British person excavated and published after Rowe, and through a series of unforeseen events over a number of years I have fallen into being the last to record the necropolis in the final decade of the twentieth century. DOCUMENTARY SOURCES

The presence of a headstone on Rowe's grave proved that there had been an executor, who could answer questions on the existence of personal belongings and the whereabouts of any archaeological papers relating to the excavations. Enquiries revealed a typed list of Rowe's ex libris books which described two large brown suitcases containing, amongst other things, his 1955 Day Book and his master set of six boxes of photographic prints, which remained untraced by me for a further seven years.‘ A copy of Rowe's typed manuscript on the life of Olga Rowe stated that he had been involved in the 1943 report on war damage in the Cyrenaica. This report had to be traced as he used photographs from it in his 1948 publication ‘New Light on Aegypto-Cyrenacan * Professor Brice had saved Alan Rowe's collection of printed tracts and had kept correspondence from the executor, Linda Shepherd, whose list of effects included Rowe's 1955 Day Book and the master set of prints; Thorn (1994), 110, 116 Appendix LII; in May 2000 a copy of Rowe's 1957 Photographic List was found in a Department of Antiquities let. ter book, written on nine loose pages tor from a quarto exercise book, which had been sent to Richard Goodchild. It tives the number of photographs taken, frames 80 to 225.

16

Relations’, and this necessitated visits to the Public Record Office at Kew, London to trace its existence in the War Office files. Examination of these files, and also the corresponding Colonial and Foreign Office files, revealed such things as his application for the post of Controller of Antiquities in the Cyrenaica and the authorities’ recognition of his good qualities, but, in their view, unsuitability for the job? A series of interviews with Rowe's friends and with people who had worked with him on his excavations in the Cyrenaica provided a substantial background, A cardboard box discovered in the home of the parents of Rowe's young friend and executor, Linda Burns, presented to me on 23rd May 1996, produced among other things his folders on the 1943 Commission to the Cyrenaica, 1955-1959 correspondence, contracts dealing with excavation and Rowe's 1956 Day Book, the first time I had been able to study his archaeological records.” Also among these was a list of his effects and the names of people who had claimed items. After seven years the fate of the archacological records was known, as these had been rescued by Professor Fairman and donated to Liverpool University.” I eventually saw them on 15th October 1996, and the discovery of these records completely changed my assessment of Rowe's work and gave a more coherent picture of his excavations than can be gained from the published reports. Alan Rowe's friend and fellow Egyptologist, Herbert Fairman, wrote on 23rd July 1968 to the executor: Tam deeply concerned about Rowe's field records. I assume that his Excavation Notebook start 3.9.55 is concerned with the records of his Cyrenaica excavations and have been published in bis second volume. Nevertheless, even though published, these records are valuable and ought not to be thrown away. May I beg you at all costs to ensure that any field records of any of his excavations and all photographs and negatives of bis excavations be deposited with some institution. For the Cyrenaica Expedition it seems to me Manchester University is the obvious place since it was a University excavation, but somehow or other all these records ought to be kept and ought to be retained where they can be looked after and be made available for consultation...” Rowe was an Egyptologist, not a Classicist, and his wartime appointment in Alexandria gave him closer experience of Ptolemaic Egypt. The Italian military enclave around Cyrene ceased ca.1935, marked by the building of the Cyrene Hotel." Only then could the necropolis be seriously studied, but this was prevented by the war, and Rowe, through a series of circumstances, became the person to tackle this neglected subject in the only extensive British excavation in the twentieth century. Although today his final publications would be considered inadequate, they were based on the standard at the time. The second report was referred to by Mortimer Wheeler FS.A. as a ‘splendid volume’, which implies the inadequate publications then available on the subject. Contemporary excavation practice was governed by post-war austerity, clearly demonstrated by the 1948 archaeological activities of Kathleen Kenyon F.S.A. in Southwark, where finds bags were reused from her earlier excavations at Jewry Wall Leicester, Jericho and Sabratha. Her small finds, like those of Rowe, were placed on cotton wool in cigarette packets, matchboxes and any other suitable small containers, as stationery and materials were limited. His excavation campaigns were probably affected by economies due to limited funds, and because of this meant a modest support staff. Rowe's standards are reflected in his need for a printed register, considered by some an unnecessary expense, but this was flawed by homogenous assemblages being selected ? Rowe (1948), 1-3 Pls. V-XVI. * Thorn (1994), 103; Thorn (2000) forthcoming. ? Burns Arch. Rowe's 1956 Day Book. Eventually I hope the Rowe Arch. Manchester cache and Burns Arch. will be united with the Fairman archive. δι Faitman Arch correspondence. Berenson (1938), 49-50 PL XI. ? Burns Arch.Cyr-folder pt. 2 fol. 94

1

for registration, unlike John Lloyd's recent excavations in Benghazi, where he was the first person to make a comprehensive analytical study of the burials, using scientific methods which were completely unappreciated by archaeologists half a century ago. The main problem was that Rowe had no ceramic specialist on site, and as for reference books, there was not the wealth of monographs and reports which exist today, demonstrated by John Cassels, who could only compare Rowe's lamps for dating with Broncer's ‘Terracotta Lamps from Corinth’, published in 1930. The lack of publications makes it appear that Rowe did not study his finds and could not make comparisons, which is vital as the origins of the artifacts give a glimpse of the burial practices connected with some of the tombs. Since I wrote the above, Faraj Mohmoud Elrashedy has published a book which deals with pottery from Cyrenaica, mostly black-glazed and red figure wares, which are included below in Section Π of the Artifacts where relevant.

INTRODUCTION

Cyrene was first surveyed by Frederick Beechey in May 1822, who showed the impressive necropolis in its entirety (Figs. 1-2). This was superseded briefly by the Huntings air survey of 1947 which tragically, being on nitrate film, has begun to decompose, a situation which was only discovered by the company when the author requested prints. The surviving film has now been copied, but only records part of the necropolis close to the city of Cyrene, and the area where New Shahat exists was too badly decomposed to save. There exists, however, an apparently complete set of prints in the Antiquities Department at Cyrene, which could be used for a photogrammetric plot of the necropolis, if it were made available John Cassels'compiled gazetteer of the more significant tombs was based on the Huntings survey, the positions of the tombs being plotted in the Department on a pencilled grid on sheets of tracing paper, now housed at Cyrene (Fig. 17). Rowe, who first foraged in the neglected Eastern and Southern Necropoleis in the 1952 campaign, recorded individual diagnostic tombs, and in 1956 Richard Tomlinson discovered additional tombs not seen by Cassels in the Eastern Necropolis (Fig. 47). All this study was carried out within ten years and laid the foundations for future research into tomb morphology. There followed Professor Sandro Stucchi's work in the Southern Necropolis prior to its extensive destruction from 1981-1995, studying the architectural aspect of the tombs. Professor Bacchielli did a detailed study of the murals inside Cyrenaican tombs, those first seen by Beechey in 1822 and later by Pacho (Figs. 5, 6). My study from 1989-2000 has been concentrated on the tombs which Rowe studied and excavated, in which I was assisted by my wife Dorothy and members of the Antiquities Department. The captions to the illustrations and plates incorporate in the bottom right-hand corner the relevant chapter and paragraph numbers, where the reader will find the figure or plate subject in more detail e.g. "Fig. 118 Location plan: eastern slope of El Mawy Land, showing relationship of Tombs N. 201-N. 202 1.8.1’. Finding Chapter II, section 8, paragraph 1 is the link which will take the reader to the main background history. This is followed by paragraph Π.8.2 which contains the archaeology and the relevant assemblage number, in this case Assemblage V which will be found on Fig. 3 in Volume IT, with the artifacts listed below. Paragraph 11.8.3 deals with the architecture and paragraph 11.8.4 is the observations. This pattern is repeated throughout all the volumes, but each individual glossary should be consulted for further and deeper information. The chapters, which should be read in conjunction with the illustrations and artifacts, are designed in the following order: Background Chapter I (Figs. 1-46) In this chapter I describe research into the archive material relating to the publications of earlier pioneers, in some cases doing additional drawing of plans and elevations of tombs they described. This was to form ἃ much-needed basis for comparison, providing the background to

20

Rowe's excavations and setting his work against these already well-known tombs when assessing them in Chapters IV-V. Rowe's excavations Chapters Π-ΠῚ (Figs. 47-206)

Within these chapters I aim to study and evaluate the original excavations by re-measuring and recording more fully the tombs which Rowe selected for survey, clearance and excavation, and to place them in their immediate surroundings, but in Chapter ΠῚ adding those tombs and sarcophagi he omitted, in order to complete the study. Evaluation Chapter IV (Figs. 207-238)

I compare in this chapter Rowe's contribution to the study of rock-cut tombs with the explorations of the earlier pioneers, in the process making an assessment of tomb morphology in the necropolis Evaluation Chapter V (Figs. 239-263) This chapter follows the same pattern as the previous one, but deals with built monuments,

sarcophagi, stelai and other grave furniture. Discussion Chapter VI (Figs. 264-286)

1 consider in this chapter evidence of the impact of historical events affecting colonization, culture and trade contacts around the Mediterranean, with special reference to Cyrenaica, reflected in regional and provincial tomb morphology and related architecture, together with various forms of funerary practices. Catalogue of Burial Accoutrements Chapter VII (Figs. 287-305)

This chapter presents the more significant architectural elements, burial furniture and burial practices ARCHITECTURAL TERMS

The terms used throughout the text are based on the glossaries of Dinsmoor (1975), 387-397, Robertson (1974), 379-393 and McKenzie (1990), 181-195.

1.1.0 Introduction

‘The awakening of antiquarian interest in ancient classical sites in North Africa involved exploration at Cyrene near the coast of modern Libya, both by nineteenth century travellers and explorers who recorded what they saw at that time (1.2.0; Figs. 3-16) and by antiquarians who gathered statuary for foreign collections (1.3.0; Figs. 18-30). Following this, in the twentieth century some archaeological excavation was carried out, mainly in the Northern Necropolis (1.4.0; Figs.

17, 31-46). Cyrene possesses several natural advantages, located on the crest of an upper plateau where it overlooks the plain of the lower plateau and the Mediterranean Sea beyond. The existence of a natural spring with constant running sweet water, a favourable climate for vegetation and a rich soil cover, beneath which is a ready supply of accessible limestone for building, were the combination of factors which caused Cyrene to germinate like the native silphium and to flourish into splendour. The testimony of its prosperity and greatness is provided by the vast necropolis where the steep plateau escarpment overlooking the sea is dramatically honeycombed by the activities of man, who had created rock-cut and built tombs and sarcophagi cut into the slopes of the wadis on the northern and western sides. In contrast, the Southern and Eastern Necropoleis on the upper plateau behind the city extended for many kilometres on the undulating carpet of the plain, the great variety of ruined tombs with their magnificent facades sunk into the terrain, half-buried in hillwash and partly concealed by vegetation. Over the centuries most of the tombs and sarcophagi had suffered the inevitable robbing by the time the first explorers arrived. EXPLORERS 1.2.0 Tomb Studies

There were two known visits to Cyrene in the eighteenth century by the French, one in 1706 by Consul Lemaire from Tripoli, who noted ‘un nombre infini des tombeaux’ and a sarcophagus with ‘deux griffons. . qui tiennent un espece de flambeau’, perhaps that in Pacho’s Tomb A (Figs. 8, 234). He was followed in 1733 by the surgeon Granger, whose account was lost, and there was ἃ failed attempt in 1766 by James Bruce, but true exploration there began with Agostino Cervelli's? brief visit in 1811-12, published much later in 1825 by Delaporte with inaccurate illustrations of

the tombs, He was the first to record an inscription to Aristoteles in the Southern Necropolis, also the Archaic rock-cut chamber tombs in the Northern Necropolis and the decorative entrance in one of them (Figs. 74-75, 212, 290). He also recorded a nearby built temple tomb (Figs. 121, 124),

ὁ Lucas (1712), 116; Cumming (1969-70), 18, Cervelli (1825), 26-28 Pls. 1I.

24

on which Delaporte incorporated an inscription from an adjacent facade loculus tomb, and made the earliest drawing of a block sarcophagus. Cervelli was followed by Paolo Della Cella who arrived in Tripoli on Ist November 1816 and recorded inscriptions the following year, mostly in the Agora? After the Napoleonic Wars and the formation of the African Association the first serious undertaking came in 1821-22 by the Beechey brothers, and in 1825 by Pacho (Figs. 3-11). By 1826 the purpose of exploration had become the gathering of antiquities, led by Colonel Warrington (13.0; Figs. 18-30). 1.2.1 Frederick W. and Henry W. Beechey 1821-1822

Henry William Beechey was appointed with his brother Lieutenant Frederick William Beechey RN. to lead a mission of exploration inland, to visit the ancient sites of Cyrenaica and to examine and report on the antiquities.’ Henry, an artist and linguist, had been personal secretary in Cairo to the British Vice-Consul Henry Salt. Part of his duties between 1817 and 1819 were to accompany Belzoni, working with him at Abu Simbel and in the discovery of Seti I's tomb at Thebes.’ This laid the basis for his knowledge of Egyptology, made fashionable by Napoleon's scientific expedition of 1798." Henry Beechey was recommended for the expedition by Captain Smyth of H.MS. ‘Adventure’? who was to dramatically improve the out-dated maritime charts by making a coastal survey between Tripoli and Alexandria, with Frederick carrying out a simultaneous survey on land." At the beginning of May 1822 the expedition approached Cyrene through the Southern Necropolis which at that time of year springs to life, with flowers flourishing in footholds in the naked rock and among the silent tombs, forming a thick carpet of lush undergrowth everywhere (Figs. 1, 3). They described the tombs ‘ranged along the sides of the roads’ and occupying the intervening spaces between the ways leading to the city, recalling the description made by the archacologist Rowe over a century later. The expedition saw ‘the busts and statues which are scattered about among the tombs’, On their arrival in Cyrene they pitched their tents by the fountain. in the Apollo Sanctuary, where they found a ‘term’ (Fig. 260)." The Beecheys description of their exploration of the Northern Necropolis begins from the Apollo Sanctuary ‘descending the side of the bill into Wadi bu Turchia, taking a ‘course along the galleries’ and ‘entering the most conspicuous of the excavated tombs en route along the roads’ (Figs. 1-2). On the ‘northern face of the heights of Cyrene’ "the various terraces descended ‘in ledges or galleries’. The terraces were deeply rutted and bordered on either side by sarcophagi and monumental tombs connected, as Hamilton noticed, ‘by means of narrow flights of steps "The eastern slope of Wadi Haleg Shaloof, with the rock face rising on the inner side of the terraces, is described as ‘aerial galleries’. OF the ‘innunterable tombs’ excavated in the rock, a ‘great number of them have architectural facades built against ? PRO FO 76/11 fol. 23. + Thor (1998), 553-574 Figs. 3-4 ? Beechey (1828), xx. * Bankes (1830), 200-208. ? Belzoni (1822), 203-214, 361 PL. 45. * Gillispie (1987), 2-4 ? PRO CO 2/12 fols. 109-111; Smyth (1854), 376-377. ? PRO ADM 2/158 fols. 320-321. 5. Becchey (1828), 421-422. ? Beechey (1828), 437 408. Ὁ Beechey (1828) PL. 11. “ Hamilton (1856), 70.

25

the smooth rock’. The ‘porticoes in front of the tombs’ were cut out of the rock, and where necessary additional work was added by the architect.” Among excavated tombs were: ‘several on a ‘much larger scale than the rest; some of these appear to have been public vaults and contain a consid. erable number of cellae; others seem to have been appropriated to single families, and in two instances we found large excavated tombs containing each a sarcophagus of white marble ornamented with ‘figures and wreaths of flowers raised in reliefon the exteriors."* These descriptions seem to relate to galleried chamber loculus tombs such as Tomb $.9 and the garland sarcophagus found in the Western Necropolis, Tomb W.107 (Fig. 11 Tomb J). The tombs show an ‘almost total absence of inscriptions’ in comparison with Ptolemeta and Teuchira. Any inscriptions which may have been present were probably on tablets ‘once let into or placed cover some part of each tomb’ facade exterior. ‘In many instances busts have been placed over the pediments on tbe outer porticoes — this describes funeral busts in niches, as for Beechey Tomb B. (Fig. 4).” Henry Beechey made no reference to tombs in the Eastern Necropolis, although the terrain was extensively surveyed by his brother over a five kilometre radius around the city of Cyrene (Figs. 1-2)."" In their publication tomb descriptions are in most cases generalities, with scanty information on locations, although the page footnotes are overwhelming in their minute detail regarding the architecture of tomb facades, based on Vitruvius.” The description of painted decoration on the entablature seems to refer to those in the Western Necropolis, Beechey Tombs B and C given below, compared with Beechey Tomb A, which is described in generous detail” Unfortunately not all the plans and elevations of the tombs which were drawn by the Beecheys were engraved for the intended plate on page 464 of the final publication. A ‘few examples’ intended for this plate were Beechey Tombs A, C, E and F, which were in a packet of inked drawings found by Dr Don Bailey in the British Museum (Figs. 5-6). These were some of their original field drawings of Teuchira, Ptolemeta, Cyrene and Apollonia.” Those of tombs and public buildings in Cyrene are finished scaled drawings, based on field notes which are at present untraced. A study in perspective of Tomb D is drawn on Whatman paper with a dated watermark of 1827, manufactured five years after the expedition had returned.” This view may be extracted from the ‘journal kept by the brothers to which the pencil of Henry Beechey lent additional interest by numerous charming drawings.” The study was reproduced as Plate 12, a view of the eastern fringe of the Northern Necropolis (Figs. 6, 39) similar to that published over forty years later by another British expedition” In 1829 a painting by Henry Beechey was exhibited at the British Institution, entitled: ‘View of Part of Cyrene, consisting of the Ancient Monuments, anda distant view of the Sea’ (75° x 111"). which may represent the subject engraved for Plate 11 in their publicaton.“ This must refer to a painting in oils, the only one known to have been done portraying Cyrene; its present whereabouts are unknown. σ᾽ Beechey (1828), 436-437. "^ Beechey (1828), 446. 7 Beechey (1828), 457. ?* Hydro. Off. Ref.C. 68-C. 69; Beechey (1828), 421-422 Pls. in ChapterXV. ? Wilkins (1812), 263-282 PL 5. ® Beechey (1828), 443-444, 451-455, Pls 9-10 % Bailey (1981), 61-74; The annotation ‘aquatinta’ noticed recently on the back of some of the drawings of Cyrene gave the evidence that these were intended for publication; Thorn (2005) (forthcoming). ® This later copy of an original drawing was apparently intended to be included on Pl. 12 of the publication, and was the final prepared engraving to be executed; Heawood (1950), 141 Pl. 466, no. 3464. ® Stephen (1885), 121-125. # Beechey (1828), Pl 12. ® Smith and Porcher (1864) Frontispiece. ? Roberts (1907), 289,

26 ‘DESCRIBED TOMBS

Tomb A, Tomb of Altalena; Figs. 4-5. The tomb facade drawing (i) is captioned: ‘Elevation of the tomb A at Cyrene — with a note ‘not excavated to the base’. The elevation differs from that published (i ).” Beechey describes the tombs in Wadi bel Ghadir as being ‘formed in one side of this ravine leading round the cliff into another valley, somewhat broader in which are also several excavated tombs’, Among these, in Wadi Halag Stawat, Mr. John Campbell, Assistant Surgeon from the ‘Adventure’, discovered the tomb ‘furnished with a Doric portico’ in the antechamber, the entablature decorated with a ‘suite of beautiful little subjects! painted individually using red, blue and yellow on the metopes of the internal frieze, ‘with great freedom of pencil and still exhibiting uncommon richness of colour’. These allegorical subjects are described in the order shown in the accompanying engraving, which differs from that published by Pacho, the fourth and fifth metopes from the left being transposed (Fig. 7 Tomb K).* Colours employed elsewhere are ‘confined to the entablature and to the capitals and plinth of the columns and pilasters.”The ‘cella’ or loculus below the entablature was cut for the reception of a single body. The entrance into the antechamber was ‘on the right hand side of i because of restrictions governing the cutting of this tomb.” The rediscovery of the tomb showed Beechey’s discarded drawing (i) to be incorrect, which must be the reason why drawing (ii) was published instead (Figs. 18, 226). Tomb B, W. 16; Fig. 4. In ἃ published general description of Doric facades referred to as ‘porticoes’ at the rear of an antechamber, the entablature is stated to be ‘sometimes monotriglyph', a feature which matches this tomb with its proximity to Beechey's Tomb C. The entablature colours are the same as for Tomb A above, blue for triglyphs and mutules, minor details picked out in red, but the metopes were extensively damaged by the later insertion of Roman funeral bust niches. Subsequently recorded by Smith and Porcher as a coloured engraving (1.3.2 Tomb I; Fig. 226).

Tomb C, W. 20; Figs. 4-5. The internal elevation of the facade is titled ‘Doric Tomb at Cyrene = not excavated to the bottom’. This is probably the tomb described by Beechey as ditriglyph, giving details of the pigments used on the facade, as that of the similar Tomb B nearby. Subsequently published by Pacho (1.2.2 Tomb H; Fig. 226)" Tomb D, N. 178; Fig. 6. This is shown in the perspective view mentioned above, and the

drawing was most probably done as a draft in reverse for part of the intended view. An oblique reference is made to this tomb in a footnote: ‘All the excavated tombs were not provided with antechambers, and the cellae in such cases commenced from the surface of the external fagade. A general description of the facade is given, followed by the observation that the entrances to the ‘cellae’ or loculi are ‘often separate facades on a small scale’, matching what is shown in the perspective drawing. The entrance was ‘originally closed with a tablet of stone’, a panelled door which must have been face down. These tablets were never entire when ‘/eft standing’ and when they were absent the tomb interiors were filled with hillwash. Subsequently recorded by Pacho (Figs. 10, 39, 219).” Tomb E, N. 10; Figs. 4, 6. There are two drawn versions entitled (i) Interior fagade of one of ® # ? * » δ

Becchey (1828), 444, 455 PI. 9. Beechey (1828), 442, 453-455 PL 10. Bacchielli (1976), 355-383. Beechey (1828), 455-456. Beechey (1828), 437-438, 433-444. Beechey (1828), 442-444.

» Beechey (1828), 437-439 n. 1 Pl. 12.

27

the tombs at Cyrene - excavated in the rock -' with the comment ‘ — excavations in the wall for the reception of cineral urns — referring mainly to niches in Loc.3; (i) shows an additional niche in the side of Loc. 1 and measurements on an accompanying plan. The publication states: ‘There are places formed in the wall at the extremity of one of the cellae in an excavated tomb, for the reception apparently of cinereal ums, as will be seen in the elevation’ based on the large glass cremation urns excavated by Consul Warrington in his garden outside Tripoli and seen by Beechey in situ only months before. The tomb was later recorded by Pacho in his range of archaic tombs (1.2.2 Tomb C; Figs. 64-65)"

Tomb F, W. 18; Fig. 4. Although no drawing survives of this tomb, reference is made to its intended inclusion as an illustration on page 464. The facade was noticed to have ‘a mixture of no orders of architecture on the same part of the building — the portico in front of the tomb being supported by Ionic columns surmounted with a Doric entablature. The whole portico is formed out of the rock itself which ‘advances a few feet before the wall of the Chamber in which the door is excavated’. The pediment, called here the ‘tympanum is bere placed immediately over the zophorus, without any cornice intervening, and the mutules are in consequence omitted’. The tomb interior ‘bas no cellae beyond the chamber but has ‘graves sunk in the floor itself and covered with tablets of stone’, the bodies arranged ‘parallel with each other round the sides of the chamber’. Subsequently shown as a published view by Pacho (1.2.2 Tomb G; Fig. 212)" Tomb G, N.241; Figs. 4, 6. The only contemporary field drawing to survive, which for some reason lacked its measurements; Beechey could not complete the drawing as an illustration because of the non-existence of this essential information. In 1989 the intended measurements were

taken by my wife and myself, and only an hour and twenty minutes was required to complete the original field drawing. Beechey’s only reference to this tomb concerns its ‘pastoral subjects’, most likely a description of the mural of the Good Shepherd on the arcosolium sarcophagus case. Subsequently published as a composite, inaccurate engraving by Pacho (1.2.2 Tomb B).*

Tomb H, No drawing exists of this particular type of tomb ‘built in imitation of temples’ which stand in different parts of the Necropolis ‘on the high ground’. These tombs ‘were usually divided in the centre by a wall along the whole length of the building’. The bodies were laid ‘one over the other in each of the compartments’, and ‘covered with a slab of marble or stone.”” Beechey's description matches a good example of a double-compartment temple tomb most probably noticed by him, Tomb 8.185, which is marked on his plan and overlooks Wadi bel Ghadir (Figs. 2, 240).

Tomb I, Fig. 4. The sarcophagi were described as ‘a single block of stone, hollowed ont’ and covered by ‘another single stone shaped into tbe form represented’ in an intended plate which never reached publication. Beechey may never have realised that the majority of these half-buried sarcophagi were rock-cut and standing in situ, as his description seems to represent a free standing block sarcophagus (Fig. 251 Tomb N. 224), Cervelli had previously executed the first drawing of ἃ block sarcophagus, inaccurately published. A report written by Henry Beechey from Malta, dated September 12th 1822 states: ‘We have » » * 77 ™

Beechey Beechey Beechey Beechey Beechey

(1828), (1828), (1828), (1828), (1828),

462-463. 450-451 442, 459-460 463-464.

28

made general plans of Bengazi, Teuchira, Ptolemeta, Apollonia, Cyrene, and Derna, with particular plans of such buildings as were most conspicuous and most perfect. A chart of the Pentapolis showing the cities and roads had been made. ‘Details of the most interesting of the tombs’, also ‘the excavated chambers and remains of buildings about the fountain’ had been obtained and inscriptions copied (Figs. 1-2, 5-6)." This is the last major archaeological work to which Henry contributed, adding greatly to our knowledge of the Cyrenaica. The premature recall of the expedition had affected him deeply, and despite his customary courteous manner in addressing Earl Bathurst his anguish is evident when he wrote: ‘notwithstanding the reluctance with which 1 left so interesting a field of research, I hastily embarked the Expedition, on receiving the order to return, under the influence of feelings which I would have given whole Empires to have been spared.”® 1.2.2 Jean-Raimond Pacho 1825

While in Egypt the botanist Jean-Raimond Pacho heard about the diverse vegetation of the Jebel Akhdar from the Arabs and was fired with enthusiasm to go to the Cyrenaica. In 1824 Henry Salt, who had previously employed Henry Beechey (1.2.1) as secretary, suggested that he might obtain sponsorship from the Société de Geographie in Paris. ‘Le but de M. Pacho était d'examiner d'une maniére complete toute la partie maritime comprise entre Alexandrie et les cötes de la grande Syrte.” Pacho accordingly set off on 3rd November, arriving at Cyrene on Saturday 8th January 1825, and stayed in Tomb A below the Apollo Sanctuary for forty-five days (Figs. 7-8). During this time he recorded in fifty drawings mainly rock- cut tombs in Wadi Haleg Shaloof and Wadi bel Ghadir, and a few sculptures from the city. No-one else has excelled in this field, and the energy required for such a feat is obvious, especially as this work was carried out during the cold, wet winter months when the steep terrain would be treacherously slippery underfoot and many of the tombs filled with rainwater or choked with centuries of hillwash, making it well-nigh impossible to take measurements and make satisfactory interior plans (Figs. 8-11). The moist atmosphere would have affected his portfolio of handmade paper and sketchbooks and given him difficulty in drawing and in drying the finished watercolours. Given these circumstances his tenacity has to be admired. Tragically, suffering from melancholia exacerbated by the conviction that his work had not been recognised for its true merits, he destroyed his personal papers, including drawings and notes on the Cyrenaica, and took his own life on 26th January 1829. His outstanding engravings, accompanied by a full text, give a glimpse of the lost drawings, notebooks and sketches. This work was published in 1827 as "Relation d'un voyage dans la Marmarique, la Cyrénaique et les oasis d’Audjelah et de Maradeb’, which Prof. Sandro Stucchi found invaluable when preparing his own classic work ‘Architettura Cirenaica’, where many of Pacho's illustrations can be seen. Pacho also compiled a corpus of Cyrenaican inscriptions which were eventually republished in 1853 and registered as CIG 5129-5360. The French Consul-General Vattier de Bourville in Tripoli would have become aware of Pacho's expedition, as a series of diplomatic letters signed by him, dating from 5th February to 7th April 1825, prove that Bourville was then in office. He would therefore be familiar with Pacho’s publication, which formed the basis for his own visit in 1848 when he searched for antiquities (13.1).° ? PRO CO 2/12 fols. 49-50; Hydro. Off. Ref. C. 60-69. © PRO CO 2/12 fols. 40-41. Pacho (1827) Notice, iv; Hoefer (1968), 12-15. © Pacho (1827),5 © PRO FO 160/46.

29 Describep Tomes

‘Tomb A, N. 398; Fig. 8. Pacho's Tomb of Residence with a Doric colonnaded facade is a hypogeum tomb, containing a broken strigillated marble sarcophagus noted in 1706 by Lemaire and possibly another ‘destroyed’ by ‘Angelo’ in 1827; fragments of these were seen by Hamilton and finally in 1861 by Smith and Porcher (13.2 Tomb H; Fig. 234).

Tomb B, N. 241; Fig. 6. The interior was first recorded by Beechey and the southern wall engraved by Pacho who described it thus: ‘Le fond a un aspect vraiment monumental : un sarcophage sy trouve creusé avec un art infini dans la paroi; il est orné de guirlandes et de tétes de bouc, et couronné d'une petite voüte en plein cintre, sculptée en coquille : lateralement au sarcophage sont deux niches decorées chacune d'un vase d'une forme tres-élégante.’ In a composite description of Cyrene tomb paintings the mural contained in an arcosolium lunette on the eastern wall is referred to by the words: "le paon, accompagné de poisson’. In the engraving, the peacock standing on a bowl of. flowers has been replaced by the subject of the Good Shepherd, which is in fact on the arcosolium sarcophagus case: ‘Un berger y est représenté la boulette à la main, entouré d'un troupeau, et portant un mouton sur les épaules.’ Pacho then describes the conch border: ‘autour du tableau des poissons de différentes especes’ and their size: ‘ils sont trois fois au moins plus grands que les moutons et le berger, et que Vartiste les a detachés du fond du tableau par une forte ombre, comme s'il avait voulu les y représenter suspendus en ex-voto.' The tomb was eventually surveyed in 1952 by Rowe (Figs. 6 Tomb G; 34, 57, 60).” Tomb C, N. 2-10; Figs. 61-76. Tomb N. 10 had previously been recorded by Beechey (Fig. 6 Tomb E). As Pacho described, the range: ‘domine toute la Nécropolis, et deploie par cette situation ἃ une trés-grande distance sa longue et magnifique galerie’ above the western slope of Wadi Haleg Shaloof. He described the facade of these as: ‘decorée au-debors de vingt-six colonnes et pilastres massifs, disposés sur une seule ligne, et ayant pour entablement la couche supérieure de la colline’ To reach this quoted number of columns and pilasters, one has to include the antae of Tomb N. 8. Pacho commented on: ‘la diversité des styles dont il est composé, et qui en forment autant de monuments distincts quoique réunis sur une méme ligne’ based on their architectural orders, realising that the Acolic Tombs N. 2-4 at "l'extrémité orientale’ belong to ‘une époque postérieure aux autres’. He describes the ‘portique’ in which there are ‘bancs’, probably those he recorded in Tombs N. 5-6, with above them ‘des noms gravés négligemment ca et là sur le roc’. No such inscriptions are now visible as the surface has been covered by a thick layer of limewash, which has also covered a small mural beside Tomb N. 5 theke (Fig. 298). He recognised that Tomb N. 8 has: "Une élégante facade, contenant deux colonnes cannelées a chapiteaux en volutes qui soutiennent une architrave ornée de frises légeres’ and comments that the other adjoining tombs lack ‘la méme dlégance de travail’. No descriptions of the burial chambers were given, although they were planned. Cervelli in 1811-12 recorded the facade of Tomb N. 5 and the entrance to N.8 and this range of tombs was subsequently photographed by Smith and Porcher (Figs. 68-69). Tomb D, N. 22; Fig. 8. Pacho called the tomb a ‘grotte’ and did not describe the facade. The rectangular chamber contains a frieze of murals first recorded by him, painted on gypsum covering a very thin layer of mortar. On the western side the subject ‘occupe toute la longeur d'une aro? portraying figures, some of whom, 'revétues de riches costumes, exécutent une marche solonnelle’; others are ‘divisées en plusieurs groupes et couvertes d'une simple draperie’. Pacho descri* Pacho (1827), 201Pl. LVIII; Thorn (1993), 61. © Pacho (1827), 208-209, 374-375, 378 Pl. XXXIX, LI. ^ Pacho (1827), 198-199 Pls. XXX, XXVIII

30

bed the mural in the form of vignettes, with at the southern end ‘une espéce de meuble, aupres duquel des jeunes gens sont occupés a préparer des mets’. He also recorded the epigraphy which is vis. ible on this wall CIG 5149b. At the northern end is ‘une table couverte de couronnes et de palmes with "trois personnages mitrés, debout chacun sur un piédestal.” The north wall shows ‘une chasse et un cirque’: on the eastern side of the central plain entrance is a ‘cerf qui en forme le principal sujet, et contre lequel un chasseur anime le soulouc, qu'il retient d'une main par un lien, et de l'autre. agite un fouet pour stimuler son ardeur'; the scene on the west of the entrance ‘est fort bizarre, en ce qu'on y voit confondus des animaux feroces, tels que le lion, le léopard s'élancant sur un taureau, ‘avec un bouc, des gazelles et des chiens lévriers.™* On the western part of the south wall is a scene "representant la lutte et le pugilat. The eastern wall is ‘entidremtent occupée par un combatde gladiateurs dont il ne reste malbeureusement qu'un fragment.”° George Warrington mentioned the tomb in a letter of 3rd August 1827, giving his intention ‘fo cut a figure out’, and it was visited by Hamilton and by Smith and Porcher (13.2 Tomb B).” Tomb E, N. 83; Fig. 173. Described as ‘une grotte sépulcrale chrétienne" based on ‘une inscription cursive, précédée de la croix’, referting to that of Demetria CIG 9136; Pacho also recorded another inscription in the far corner of the tomb CIG 5149. He followed with a description of the arcosolium mural ‘la vigne du Seigneur’ referring to intertwined stems emerging from a kantharos. .. ‘ses longues lianes, ses grappes pourprées, et ses larges feuilles grimpant autour de longs batons placés ἃ cóté des sarcophages’ referring to the vertical thyrsus on the pilaster. ‘Autre part elle couvre des treillages figures dans l'intérieur des cintres, ou bien elle forme une frise de festons tout autour du monument’ refers to the dado decoration in the niche, later seen by Smith and Porcher (13.2 Tomb D; Fig. 294)" Tomb F, “Tomba dei Mnasarch? N. 171; Fig. 9. Pacho noted various inscribed statue bases facade debris in the tomb forecourt, also seen two years later by the Sardinian Consul Pietro Negri (Fig. 231). CIG 5155-5156, 5159-5160, 5162, 5169-5170 among

Tomb G, W. 18; Fig. 4. Described as ‘deux grottes sépulerales y sont creusées l'une au-dessus de l'autre! combined with Tomb H; previously reported more fully by Beechey (1.2.1 Tomb F).” Tomb H, W. 20; Fig. 5. Described with Tomb G, included in a view of a plain internal ante-

chamber facade which shows more detail than the earlier one by Beechey, and subsequently as a watercolour elevation by Porcher (Fig. 4 Tomb C; 1.3.2 Tomb W. 20).*

Tomb I, W. 27-31; Fig. 11. Range of tombs without porticoes, described as ‘une longue suite A bypogées’... ‘mais dépourvus du portique’, showing pilasters and capitals... ‘au lieu d'érre séparés de l'entrée des grottes, il sont simplement sculptés aux parois extérieures et latéralement à ces en«νόον, These lead into an individual square chamber containing three wall sarcophagi with cover slabs. The exterior was photographed in 1861 by Smith (1.3.2 Tomb W.27-30; Fig. 215).” © Pacho (1827), 203, 375-377 Pls. XLIX, L. = Pacho (1827), 376 PL LII © Pacho (1827), 376-377 PL LIII; Bacchielli (2002), 285-312 Figs. 1-14 Taw. LVI. ? Thorn (1993), 59-60. ® Pacho (1827), 207 PL LV. ® Pacho (1827), 396.397 Pl. LXV 4; CIG 5155-5156, 5159-5160, 5162, 5169-5170; Doc. Ant. 1-1 (1933), 116-118 nos. 115-120 Figs. 70-76; Beschi (1972), 168-170, 233, 244, 247, 260, 262 Figs. 24, 68 no. 26, 76 no. 38, 77 no. 39, 85 no. 62, 87 no. 69; information on Pietro Negri from Abdulhakeem Amer Tweel. » Pacho (1827), 374-375 Pl. XLIM; Ghislanzoni (1915), 158 Figs. 76-77. » Pacho (1827), 200 Pls. XLILI-XEIV. » Pacho (1827), 119-200Pl. XLIL.

31

Tomb J, W. 107; Fig. 11. The hypogeum tomb interior was described as: ‘Cette grotte, dont l'entrée et l'intérieur sont tr és, formait une piece ayant trois subdivisions, dont deux latérales à l'entrée, et la troisiéme au fond. Elles contenaient chacune un sarcophage en marbre de styles différents.’ These were colossal, one garland and two strigillated, the former having since lost its lid, and in 1993 the latter was wantonly destroyed." Pacho also recorded fragments of a battle sarcophagus, another piece of which was found later by Bourville in 1848 (1.3.1 Tomb A; Fig. 234)”

Tomb K, Tomb of Altalena; Figs. 4-5. The interior, previously recorded by Beechey, was described by Pacho: ‘Ces peintures sont dans une petite salle dont les parois, trés-unies et peintes d'un vert tendre, lui donnaient plutét l'air d'un riant cabinet aérien que d'une excavation sépulcrale’ Concerning the burial, he wrote: ‘Le fond de cette jolie grotte en rappelle seul la destination; il est occupé par un sarcophage creusé dans le roc’ representing a loculus grave, ‘couronné d'une frise en triglyphes’ describing the entablature. His engraved representation of the frieze differs from Beechey’s by showing the fourth and fifth metopes counterchanged, all the metopes later removed in 1848 by Bourville (Figs. 18 Tomb B; 226).* UNDESCRIBED TOMBS

Mainly in the Northern Necropolis, Pacho recorded a number of tomb facades as elevations only, probably because their silting with hillwash made further exploration impossible, and he therefore gave no tangible descriptions. In the Southern Necropolis he recorded some of the epigraphy inside the tombs along the Balagrae road and in the Western Necropolis in Wadi bel Ghadir (Fig. 7). N. 17, Fig. 8. Rock-cut tomb, upper part of fagade recorded showing cut statuary above entrance of Loc.2, but ignoring three sarcophagi immediately above cornice, whose cases form part of facade. Eventually surveyed by Porcher in 1861 (13.2 Tomb A; Fig. 225).” N. 24225, Fig. 8. Rock-cut facades with epigraphy CIG 5178 above entrances, buried in hillwash, lost isodomic entablature and screen above. N. 24 has four double-level loculi, one reused to form access to chamber behind. N. 25 has three double-level loculi. Subsequently rediscovered in 1911 by Norton (Figs. 34, 222).

N. 36, Fig. 36. View and measured elevation of a rock-cut facade loculus tomb with built entablature, shown in 1861 as a watercolour vignette by Porcher (1.3.2 Tomb N. 36; Figs. 32, 221). N. 38, Fig. 9. Rock-cut tomb with enclosed forecourt, two entrances to double-level loculi with remains of built screen above Ionic entablature (Figs. 23, 221).

N. 39, Fig. 10. Plain rock-cut five-loculus tomb fagade, with remains of isodomic screen above; internally extended laterally in Loc.1 with a pair of shallow trough-like graves, each with a % 7. ® ” ^ δι ©

Pacho Pacho Pacho Pacho Pacho Pacho Pacho

(1827), (1827), (1827), (1827), (1827), (1827), (1827),

200, 379PL LVL. 200.201, 379-380 Pl. LVII. 210-211, 377-378 PL LIV. 384 PI. LXXXVIII, also PL. XXIX for naiskos recalling example above N. 258 (Fig. 28) 382 PL LXV, 12; CIG 5178; Robinson (1913), 195. 374 Pls, XXXIII XXXIV 2. 374 Pls. XXX, ΧΧΧΙ,2,2b.

32

raised sink-hole in one corner. Loc.5 was cut as an incomplete square chamber loculus system (Figs. 23, 32, 221).° N. 52, Fig. 9. Small isodomic-built rectangular temple tomb with double-level compartment above ground level, shown by Pacho only as an elevation (Fig. 243). N. 55, Fig. 8. Rock-cut tomb overlooking ancient road showing three widely-spaced loculi entrances, the third left unpierced, and a fourth later entrance ignored by Pacho in order to make the drawing regular; built cornice above entablature now missing; rock-cut stele on pedestal beside Loc.1 (Figs. 232, 259).9

N. 57, Fig. 107. Built shrine tomb with panelled orthostats, partly buried in hillwash, probably cleared in 1947 by Burton Brown (Fig. 37). N. 65, Fig, 9. Built Doric facade loculus tomb with pilasters and seven entrances, only the southern part recorded by Pacho; the northern part had probably already collapsed (Fig. 219)" N. 66, N. 84, Fig. 10. Kenissieh catacomb complex, first mentioned by Beechey and shown on Pacho's map. The interior, now inaccessible, contains Late Roman burial practices with three marble inscribed bases which Pacho recorded CIG 5167, including parts of Tomb N. 84 which was cleared by Burton Brown (1.2.1; 13.1 Tomb E; Fig. 45). N. 165, Fig. 30. Only planned by Pacho and also shown on his map; the tomb is to the east of the 1981 modern road to Shahat, past the ‘Tomba dei Mnasarchi' N. 171 (Figs. 37, 207, 229).° N. 178, Fig. 10. Pacho’s and Porcher's views are combined with Tomb N. 179 and show a facade elevation with four loculi entrances, while Beechey’s perspective of this tomb erroneously shows only three (1.3.2; Figs. 6 Tomb D; 39, 219).””

N. 179, Fig. 10. Combined view with Tomb N. 178, free standing facade with remains of isodomic screen above, now fallen, revealing rock-cut face with loculi behind; enclosure area welldefined by dwarf rock-cut wall with chamfered coping beside the ancient road with centrallyplaced opening as an entrance (Fig. 219)" N. 180, Fig. 10. Built mausoleum loculus tomb fortuitously recorded by Pacho and later in a view by Porcher, probably destroyed by General Tassoni ca.1915, using the stone for repairing the ancient road for military purposes (L.1.1; Fig. 245).”

N. 196, Fig. 45. Rock-cut fagade loculus tomb with hillwash in forecourt, recorded only as a view, subsequently photographed by Weld-Blundell (1.2.3; Figs. 43, 220).” N. -, Unregistered by Cassels, facade loculus tomb with Doric entablature and four entrances adjoining Blundell Tomb D, showing on the architrave inscription CIG 5151 in large letters. This

© Pacho Pacho © Pacho ^ Pacho © Pacho © Pacho © Pacho ™ Pacho ?' Pacho ® Pacho ® Pacho

(1827), (1827), (1827), (1827), (1827), (1827), (1827), (1827), (1827), (1827), (1827),

374 Pls. XXX, ΧΧΧΙ,1,1α. 374 Pls. XXXIL, XLVL2; Ghislanzoni (1915), 106 Fig. 53. 375 Pl. XLVI; Rowe (1948) Pl. VII 374 Pl. XXVI2, 2a-b. 374 Pls. XXXII, XXXIV,1; Buttle Arch.Ph. 2/31 Thesis Pl. 45. 381-382 Pls. XXXIX, LXI, LXIV, LXV,6; Cassels (1955), 19 Pl. Xe. 375 PI. XLVIIL2. 374 Pls. XL, XLL2,2a. 374 Pls. XL, XLLI. 375 Pls. XLV, XLVI; Smith and Porcher (1864) Frontispiece. 374 Pl. XXXVI1, 1a-b.

33

epigraphy was erroneously shown on Cervelli’s 1811-12 temple tomb drawing, which may be a bad representation of Tomb N. 202 nearby (1.2.0; II.8.1;

Figs. 118, 121, 124).

N. -, Unregistered by Cassels in the vicinity of Tomb N. 192, rock-cut long chamber loculus tomb with antechamber. Epigraphy CIG 5152 over two rear loculus entrances, the letters well cut.”

N. 236, Fig. 27. Pacho may not have entered the tomb, whose floor is under water in the winter months, but he recorded one of the Roman facade inscriptions CIG 5166, also recorded later by Porcher (1.3.2 Tomb G; Fig. 233)

W. 48, Fig. 11. Tristyle Archaic Ionic rock-cut tomb, architrave showing row of equallyspaced holes cut into it implying paterae, square burial chamber with low klinai; photographed seventy years later by Weld-Blundell (1.2.3 Tomb B; Figs. 26, 212).”

S. 10. Rock-cut unfinished, adapted galleried chamber loculus tomb with Pacho’s epigraphy CIG 5157A-B cut in large letters over the two pairs of loculi on either side, briefly noted by Cherstich before the sun went down.* S. 74, Fig. 11. Rock-cut unfinished long chamber loculus system, with Pacho’s epigraphy CIG 5157C over two loculi on the left seen later by Cassels and Cherstich, who studied this tomb.”

S. -, Fig. 30. Unregistered by Cassels. Galleried chamber loculus tomb with Pacho's epigra-

phy to Aristoteles CIG 5154 over a loculus entrance. Previously seen by Cervelli entered ‘par un couloir long de quinze brasses, (24.30m) qui contenait cing portes. mait un couloir de sa propre largeur, et long de sept brasses (11.34m). C'est sur une fai copié l'inscription susdite. Au fond du couloir principal était une autre porte

in 1811-12, who Chaque porte ferde ces portes que trös-large et trés-

basse, à la gauche de laquelle il semblait qu'on avait creusé deux petits bassins, l'un au-dessus de l'autre; au fond j'ai vu un déme ou tombeau, avec une ouverture au-dessus. Subsequently recorded in 1861 in Porcher’s watercolour view and plan.”

S. -, Fig. 11. Unregistered by Cassels, Said Faraj Tomb A. Rock-cut tomb with built facade, dwarf entrances to wide chamber loculus system, where Pacho's epigraphy CIG 5163 was rediscovered in 1970 by Said Faraj of the Antiquities Department (Fig. 227). 1.2.3 Herbert Weld-Blundell 1894-1895

On 5th December 1892 Herbert Weld-Blundell wrote to the British Prime Minister William Gladstone about his intention ‘to undertake a journey to Barca, the ancient Cyrene and Cyrenaica’ with a view to future excavation. In his report, illustrated with photographs, to the Trustees of τε Cervelli (1825),27 Pl. 1,5; CIG 5151; Pacho (1827),382 Pl. LXVI,8. ® Pacho (1827), 382 PL. LXVI ® Pacho (1827), 375 Pl. LXV,10, CIG 5166. ® Pacho (1827), 375 Pl. XLVIL. ™ Pacho (1827), 382 Pl. LXVI,1 (upper and middle); CIG 5157A,B; Cherstich (2002) Appendix, 17; This tomb, thought by Cherstich to be S. 10, is more likely to be the neighbouring tomb registered only by Tomlinson as his 1008. Pacho (1827), 382 Pl. LXVI (lower), CIG 5157C was found to be in Tomb S. 74 on the other side of the Balagrae road. Cherstich (2000), 17-21 Figs. 3034; (2002), 180-184 Tav. 93A-B Appendix, 31. ® Cervelli (1825), 26 Pl. 1,3; CIG 5154; Pacho (1827), 382 Pl. LXV.9. 5. Pacho (1827), 382 PL LXVL3-6; CIG 5163, 5176; Said Faraj (1978-79), 231-237 Figs. 1-4. 5. Brit. Mus. MSS Dept. 44516 fol 298.

34

the British Museum, he described arriving at Merj on 4th November 1894 and proceeding to

Cyrene, where he stayed over a fortnight, during which time he ‘:horoughly examined the city and its necropolis (Fig. 12). He concluded that ‘most of the tombs of the necropolis have been violated but those covered by earth ‘might yield results’ > The most important contribution made by Weld-Blundell was with a camera, probably using quarter-plate size roll film like that employed by ELS. Cowper when he visited Tripolitania in 1895. Smith and Porcher, although they took many photographs in 1861 (13.2), neglected to publish their views of the city of Cyrene and its ruins; Weld-Blundell was thus the first person to publish such views, consisting of the Agora area, the Sacred Way, the Temple of Zeus and the tower of the city wall overlooking Wadi bel Ghadir.” Another four are devoted to rock-cut tombs in the Northern and Western Necropoleis. The first is a general view of the range of archaic Tombs N. 2-9 (Fig. 67). The second is a close-up of Tombs N. 7-9, a similar view to that by Smith and Porcher showing undisturbed hillwash; the tombs were republished thirty-two years later (Figs. 68-69, 79). The two final photographs are Wadi bel Ghadir and El Mawy land Tombs C andD (Fig. 210). DrscuiBED TOMBS.

Tomb A, N. 2-9; Figs. 67-76. General view with hillwash in front and close study of Tombs N. 7-9, previously recorded by Smith and Porcher. All these were eventually surveyed by Rowe (Fig, 69). Weld-Blundell described the pillars of Tombs N. 2-4: ‘the general effect from the front view of Ionic capitals; they are, however, merely Doric capitals, cut with a flat surface, sliced, in fact, in such a way that the section presents the general outline of an Ionic capital with the details erased.’ (1.3.2; Figs. 208-209).

Tomb B, W. 48; Fig, 11. Previously photographed by Smith and Porcher, and featuring in a later photograph published by Maioletti in 1931 (1.3.2 Tombs W. 48-50; Pigs. 26, 212). Tomb C, W. 41; Figs. 13, 16. Plain distyle rock-cut facade with heavy block capitals on pillars, rectangular burial chamber behind with later cut barrel-vaulted arcosolia (Fig. 210). ‘UNDESCRIBED TOMBS.

W. 100 Rock-cut tomb, free standing built facade with five loculi; Doric engaged columns with architrave above and two ashlar courses, its built entablature and screen now fallen. This was subsequently recorded during Norton’s 1911 campaign.”

W.103-104 Ruins of isodomic temple Tomb W.104 in ruins behind, reached by a wide rock-

© Brit. Mus. G. R. Dept. Rep. Weld-Blundell fo. 6; Bailey (1996), 67-70 Figs. 1-4 Cowper (1897), xvi © White (1998), 592 Fig. 5 Tav. IV.2. % Hogarth (1905), PL opp. 100; Weld-Blundell was killed during the First World War. A small collection of his photographs will be found in the archives of the British School at Athens. © Brit, Mus. G. R. Dept. Rep. Weld-Blundell Ph. 10; (1896), 132 no. 6. ® Weld-Blundell (1896), 136-137 Fig. 8; Stucchi (1975), 171 Figs. 153-155. © Weld-Blundell (1896), 133,135 Fig. 7. ® Brit. Mus. G. R. Dept. Rep. Weld-BlundellPh. 14; Cassels (1955), 35.

35 cut staircase from the enclosed forecourt of Tomb W.103 below, which is a plain facade three lo-

culus system, at present used as a living room in the summer months.”

N. 196, Fig, 45. Buried tomb forecourt, the hillwash slightly higher than shown in Pacho's engraving. Called at one time ‘Tassoni’s Tomb’, after a commemorative plaque placed there in 1913; later cleared in 1947 by Burton Brown as his Tomb F (1.1.1; Figs. 15, 43, 220).” Tomb D, Fig. 16. Unregistered by Cassels, above and to the east of Tomb N. 203 in El Mawy land in front of a later cut quarry; this is an archaic chamber tomb similar to Tomb C but including a stylobate, containing a wall sarcophagus, the tomb presently used as a shelter for animals. In the same complex are three facade loculus tombs, one with four entrances showing a Doric archi trave above, across which is the large cut inscription CIG 5151 seen by Cervelli in 1812 and thirteen years later by Pacho (Figs. 14, 210).”

Tomb E. On eastern side of Wadi bu Turchia near to Tomb N. 287, at present unidentified. At least five loculus entrances, eroded pilasters supporting a decorative architrave with taenia, mutules and guttae." 1.2.4 John Cassels 1953-1954

In a memorandum to the British Military Administration on Cyrenaica concerning ‘The Future of Archaeological Research’ written during 1943, Major J.B. Ward-Perkins recommended specifically for the Cyrene Necropolis: ‘A systematic survey followed by clearance of selected tombs 1o provide an absolute chronology This recommendation resulted four years later in the involvement of Captain Burton Brown (Fig. 37), and on 7th October 1953 John Cassels, a young graduate from Trinity College, Cambridge, who was awarded a Rome Scholarship, wrote introducing himself to C.N. Johns, Controller of Antiquities in Cyrene: ‘Mr Ward-Perkins and Prof. Toynbee have suggested to me that it might be a fruitful line of research to go to Cyrene & study there the necropolis with the view to making a general study of the tombs & trying to evolve a typological sequence of them; & later with the assistance of an architect to make a detailed survey of a small area of prominent significance if such can be found (Fig. 17). Prior to Cassels’ work only about eighty tombs, mainly rock-cut, had been studied by the explorers referred to in this chapter, the majority in the Northern Necropolis. His fieldwork took place mainly from November 1953 to January 1954 with the help of Abdulhamid Abdussaid, during which time he classified and recorded 1,271 significant tombs around Cyrene, and redesignated the areas of the necropolis, also studying comparative tombs at Saf Saf, Messa, Ras el Hilal, Mghernes and Tolmeita (Fig. 264). He filled six quarto notebooks, which I have found invaluable, and also did a photographic survey of the more significant tombs, mainly in the Northern and Western Necropoleis, and a few in the Eastern. The original field drawings, inked copies and those eventually used, showing parts of the Italian Eastern and Western Necropoleis, which became respectively the Northern and Southern in the publication, are housed in the Antiquities Department at Cyrene (Figs. 17, 47). Cassels’ fieldwork represents his outstanding achievement in recording a vast cemetery and remains the definitive pub? ® ? ? ? ™

Brit. Mus. G. R. Dept. Rep. Weld-Blundell Ph. 14; Ghislanzoni (1915), 158 Fig. 79. Brit. Mus. G. R. Dept. Rep. Weld-Blundell Ph. 6; Goodchild (1971), 169 Abb. 136; Thorn (1998) Tav. IV.2. Pacho (1827) Pl. LXVI; CIG 5151; Cassels (1955) PL Ile Brit Mus. G.R. Dept. Rep. Weld Blundell Ph. 13. PRO FO 1015/107 Rept. 8 fol.9. Ant. Dept. Cyr. Letter Books 1953 Misc. and Drawing Office Maps nos. 80-85.

36

lished work on the subject, laying the foundation for further research by others.” His typology is discussed further under rock-cut tombs (IV.1.0) and for built tombs (V.1.0, V.2.0, V3.0, V.4.0, V5.0).

12.5 Richard Tomlinson 1956

Richard Tomlinson, a young classical student who was writing on Macedonian tomb architecture, had already visited Alexandria and Cyprus, and after reading the comments made by Smith and Porcher on the Doric order at Cyrene went there in February/March 1956 in an attempt to find parallels to the Alexandrian tombs. Tomlinson was there for only three weeks, during which time he followed in Cassels’ footsteps with a trained eye, exploring the same terrain and making copious architectural notes on the tombs that he saw. He had not seen Cassels’ publication, which appeared later that year, but Richard Goodchild at Cyrene let him use copies of Cassels’ maps of the Northern and Western Necropoleis. Those for the Southern and Eastern Necropoleis were not available, so Tomlinson applied his own independent numerical system to these areas. With a 35mm Braun Paxette fixed lens camera, tripod and seven films he produced a collection of excellent photographs, giving a glimpse of many of the monuments which have since been destroyed (Figs. 17, 207). He identified the existence of a major series of previously untecognised isodomic-built tombs with false facades which he published later." In 1994 I corresponded with him in connection with Rowe’s tombs, unaware that his work was so extensive. This only became apparent when, on reworking Cassels’ original field notes on the necropolis for intended publication, I contacted Tomlinson again to enquire about his necropolis papers. As a result, on 21st February 2002 Richard Tomlinson passed to me on loan his 1956 fair notebook, slightly larger than AS, with the neatly written-up notes covering 180 pages. He includes a detailed classification, running from A to O, of the archaic and Hellenistic tombs and sarcophagi but omits any drawings and largely ignores later Roman adaptations of the tombs.” Because of their significance, the original field notes of both Cassels and Tomlinson are now being amalgamated and reworked to form an annotated gazetteer ofall the available information on the necropolis." ANTIQUARIANS 1.3.0 Tomb Studies.

‘The first major antiquities gathered were accumulated by Colonel Hanmer Warrington, British Consul at Tripoli from 1814 until 1846, whose pastime was to excavate his large garden, located on the site of an ancient cemetery. He wrote in 1821:

‘Lam really in a Mine of Antiquities and Can open a Vault at any time for my amusement which is hardly ever unproductive but generally highly Interesting --

Some time since I found one & wishing Mr Beachey should see the nature & Character of it, I left the Contents untouched till His arrival, & I may add His astonishment was excited by the Inter-

esting view of the Interior. —

# The Notebooks of Cassels and Tomlinson on the Necropolis of Cyrene, ed. by J. C. and D. M. Thorn (in preparation). ® Tomlinson (1967), 241-256 Pls. 44-47. ” Tomlinson’s personal papers: 1956 notebook entitled "Cyrene: the tombs’ "= In co-operation with Prof. ssa Fabbricoti of Chieti University.

37

Ten large Glass Sarcophagus (nine being Perfect, & three Terra Cotta jars, all containing burnt Bones arranged round the Vault, & Interspersed with Glass Bottles, Plates, Dishes Cups etc. Sarcophagus lined with Linen, one Bottle Containing a liquid resembling Wine, & three Lamps (Iron) with the Wick perfect & numerous Interesting things. — PS. The Glass Sarcophagus covered with lead, but time had reduced that Substance to the resemblance of Silver Paper, so much so that I could not remove it ^?!

This description was to form the basis of the interpretation by Henry Beechey of the niches in his Tomb E (Figs. 6, 64, 261, 300). Sixty years later Colonel Warrington's son Frederick recalled this discovery in the garden when they ‘came across vast quantities of Roman Remains including a bottle of wine and 2 eggs in a tomb. ‘Warrington’ father tasted the wine & spilt some over a pair of white ducks in which δ was dressed.’ They were never able to eradicate the stain, and ‘The eggs were nothing but shells quite empty. All the inside bad entirely evaporated"'* Warrington's ambition was to extend his activities to the Pentapolis, and the visit by the Beechey brothers in 1821 interrupted his plans; it is likely that, through correspondence, he engineered the failure of their expedition (1.2.1). After Lord Bathurst recalled the Beecheys he instructed Warrington to collect from Cyrene any antiquities they had found (Fig. 260). It was not until 1826 that Frederick Wartington visited Cyrene and recorded inscriptions in the City. The next year another son, George, excavated in the Apollo Sanctuary," and the same year other inscriptions, both in the city and the necropolis, were recorded by the Sardinian Consul from Tripoli, Pietro Negri. In the mid nineteenth-century the Benghazi consuls were active in obtaining antiquities from the Pentapolis, either by purchase or through excavation. The French ViceConsul Bourville at Tripoli ransacked the Benghazi necropolis and visited Cyrene in 1848-9, becoming the first person to purposely excavate tombs, in the Western Necropolis (1.3.1). Because of these French activities the British Government appointed Warrington’s successor at Tripoli, Col. Herman, to go to the Pentapolis in 1849, to report on what he saw. His Vice-Consul at Benghazi, Francis Werry," was appointed in 1852, and Mr Hawkins, then Keeper of the Department of Antiquities in the British Museum, reported to the Trustees that Werry had ‘excavated several tombs in the Cyrenaica district and has brought to England the fruits of his labours’. These arrived at the British Museum in 1856 in nineteen cases, from which 140 items were selected for purchase.” In 1860 Frederick Crowe discovered at Benghazi a built subterranean tomb and recorded his findings in manuscript form," just before the visit of Smith and Porcher (13.2; Fig, 269). George Dennis in 1865 was the first person to describe the burial practices and artifacts he found in the Pentapolis (1.3.3); his activities mark the decline of interest until the arrival of WeldBlundell thirty years later (12.3). 1.3.1 M. Vattier de Bourville 1848-1849 Towards the end of 1847 renewed interest in the Cyrenaica was emerging. Jean Vattier de

Bourville, formerly French Consul at Cairo, and later Vice-Consul at Tripoli and then Benghazi, was entrusted with a scientific mission by his Government, with the aim of exploring certain parts τὰ "= "© τοι 7^ "% ?"

FO 160/42; Beechey (1828), 15. RG. Soc. Arch. Gill (1881-1882) fol. 8. Thom (1993), 57-76. Hamilton (1856), 155-156. Brit. Mus. Cent. Arch. Letterbook L fol. 34, Bailey (1972), 166; (1988), STE. Thorn (1998), 537.

38

of the ancient Cyrenaica.!® In a letter to M. Letronne written in Benghazi on 3rd April 1848, shortly after returning from his first campaign, he gave an account of his activities at Teuchira and Ptolemeta, where from the fortress wall he removed the great inscription of the Byzantine Emperor Anastasius (A.D.491-518), now in the Louvre Museum in Paris. He was subsequently at Cyrene for nearly two months, looking for inscriptions and excavating. He reported finding two rock-cut tombs in the Western Necropolis, which Pacho had seen twenty-three years before, on the western side of Wadi bel Ghadir overlooking the line of the ancient road from Cyrene (Fig. 7). The following are the tombs he explored, of which no drawings are known, except for inscriptions and sculptures found in ‘Tombs A, C and E. These include the only collection of Roman

funerary statuary reputed to have been found in connection with a tomb, a fact which is questionable. ‘Descripep Tomas

Tomb A, W. 107. In clearing the forecourt ‘oft existait jadis un magnifique portique, j'ai découvert jusqu'à présent, parmi les décombres, quatre fits de belles colonnes en marbre blanc avec leurs bases et leurs chapiteaux en volutes d'ordre ionique, et un immense bloc de marbre blanc uni qui servait de frise’. Among the debris was discovered ‘une belle statue de femme’ in the manner of the ‘Grosse Herkulanerin’; the head was found separately, and its style dates it to the later Antonine period." In the same area was a himation statue with fragments of the left hand holding a scroll and a sandalled right foot, each showing iron dowels, and a detached bearded ‘irés-belle téte d'homme (Fig. 18). These fragments were mentioned in a letter of February 2nd 1852 from Bourvilles solicitor to the Louvre Museum which states that they ‘ne sont pas encore arrivées’ from Malta, the torso being left on site. He mentioned the existence of ‘quatre statues plus ou moins mutilées et decapitées’ which he realised devoir exister en cet endroit’. In 1860 Smith and Porcher saw two headless marble statues lying nearby." Bourville's description of the interior echoes that of Pacho, ‘Cet bypogée est divisé en trois ρίδρος, et chacune contenait un sarcophage qui, chacun, devait dire un chef-deuore’. In tomb debris Bourville found ‘un fragment de bas-relief, ayant appartenu sans aucun doute a un des trois sarcophages et representant une partie de corps d'un guerrier dont la 1öte intacte, couverte d'un casque est entiörement detachée du fond’, probably a fragment of the broken battle sarcophagus, and another female statue: 'ur superbe buste drapé en beau marbre de Paros auquella téte manque malbeureusement (Figs. 11 Tomb J; 234). Tomb B, Tomb of Altalena; Figs. 4-5. Situated high up in Wadi Haleg Stawat and last described by Pacho. Bourville's description relates to the ‘six metopes contenant chacune des peintures du plus grand interét’ which he removed, wrecking the whole entablature, a wanton act lamented by Hamilton as well as Smith and Porcher (1.2.2 Tomb K; 1.3.2 Tomb J; Figs. 18, 226).^ Tomb C, unidentified; Fig. 18. He found ‘une demi-statue en marbre découverte dans un autre hypogee' where the evidence of root tendrils still visible on the back seems to indicate that it

τ Bierbrier (1995), 434. © Pacho (1827),397 Pl. LXXIII; Bourville (18488), 150-154; (1848b), 279; CIG 5187. % Rosenbaum (1960), 68 no. 80, Pls. L,4, LXXIV,2. τι Smith and Porcher (1864), 39; Rosenbaum (1960), 2 n. 2. 94 no. 161 Pl. LXXIIL3; "= Pacho (1827) PI, LVII; Bourville (1848), 152-3; (1850), 581-2Pl. 1; Rosenbaum (1960), Baratte and Metzger (1985), 262-264 Cat. 168-169. ?? Bourville (1850), 582.

39

was found lying face down, with the left side mostly exposed, originating possibly from a loculus tomb, and now in the Louvre Museum.!"*

Tomb D, 8.4. Situated on the west side of the ancient road to Balagrae; an imposing ruin of a monument, in the tumble of which was a large marble inscribed pillar stele CIG 5147. This was apparently not noted by Pacho although he was in the vicinity, but the epigraphy was recorded ca.1827 by Pietro Negri, and the stele was later recorded in a watercolour by Porcher (Fig. 256). Nearby another large headless marble female half-figure was discovered, on an inscribed statue base CIG 5164 (13.2 Tomb L).” Tomb E, N. 66; Fig. 10. From the Kenissich catacomb complex interior Bourville recorded

two of the three inscriptions previously seen by Pacho"" and added another CIG 5153 which was also seen by Smith and Porcher (1.2.2; 1.3.2 Tomb C).

Artifacts Bourville material is mainly housed in the Musée du Louvre in Paris, Département des Antiquités Grecques et Romaines (Inv.no.1775-1778, 1781, 1784-1785, 2435)."* 1.3.2 R. Murdoch Smith and Edwin

A. Porcher 1861

A letter written in Malta to Charles Newton of the British Museum by Lieutenant Smith on 18th May 1860 outlined his intentions for an expedition to the Cyrenaica: ‘I have formeda project of going to examine Cyrene and the Pentapolis and hope to be able to carry it out. The only information about it is Captain Beechey's book. .. 1 should like to go and make plans of the principal sites between Cyrene & Bengazi but chiefly Cyrene itself. The country is covered with beautiful architectural Greek tombs. I should make plans of the principal ones and take photographic views of them & of any architecture or sculpture that I might find."”... ‘Porcher the First Lieut. of the Hibernia whom you remember meeting here would be very glad to go. He would be very usefulas he takes great interest in these things and is besides a good surveyor & draughtsman." The arrival of Lieutenants Smith and Porcher in Cyrene was on Sunday afternoon, 23rd December 1860 in the midst of a storm of wind and rain from the north-west (Fig. 19). They sought shelter in some rock-cut tombs beside the road running through the ancient city. Having cleared out the debris, they used them as their ‘Tomb of Residence’. Some of the photographs produced during their ten-month stay, until 13th October 1861, are the earliest photographic views of the Necropolis, showing the eastern slope of Wadi Haleg Shaloof (Figs. 20-23), close-ups of the archaic tombs, and those in Wadi bel Ghadir. The photographs were sent as numbered Enclosures with Smith's first despatch of 23rd February 1861 and their subject-matter is identified here: Enclosure 11 (Fig. 68). View of tristyle Doric and distyle Ionic Tombs N. 7-9, similar view taken subsequently by Weld-Blundell (Figs. 69, 79). ?* Bourville (1848a), 154; (1850), 582 Pl. I; Beschi (1972), 281 Fig. 96, items 105a-b. CIG 5147, 5164; Letronne (1848), 374-377 nos. VI-VII; Bourvlle (1850), 584-585; Beschi (1972), 201-203 Fig. 59. ?* Pacho (1827), 582 Pl. LXV,6. ?" Bourville (1850), 585-586; CIG 5153. ‘08 Baratte and Metzger (1985), 36, 46, 186, 188, 248, 7" Brit. Mus. G. R. Dept. Ph. Album II fols. 19-25, © Brit. Mus. G. R. Dept. Orig. Lett. II (1861-1868) fol. 705. 7? Weld-Blundell (1896), 123 Fig. 2. 2 Smith and Porcher (1864), 20-23, Pls. 9, 18, 40.

40

Enclosure 13 (Fig. 24). General view looking up Wadi bel Ghadir showing Tombs W.26-30 with engaged Ionic pilasters, Amor Bon Abdi Seyat and Sheikh Bochlega seated in front of Tomb W.28; similar view drawn previously by Pacho (Figs. 11, 215). Enclosure 14 (Fig. 25). View taken further down the wadi at 90° from previous view, showing Amor and three workmen in front of Acolic distyle Tomb W.33 with lightly-cut architrave and pediment silhouette, frieze omitted; tall rectangular niche over entrance. Square chamber surrounded by low continuous klinai (Fig. 210). Enclosure 15 (Fig. 26). View taken further down the wadi, showing surroundings of Archaic Tonic tristyle and distyle Tombs W.48-50. A similar view was taken subsequently by WeldBlundell (1.2.3; Figs. 209, 212).*

For a few weeks they devoted their attention to the excavation of rock-cut tombs, but their results were negligible, as relayed in the first despatch and the published account: *. .we removed to a rock-tomb in the Wadi Bil Ghadir... After a day and a half's digging we came to a doorway, five or six feet below the surface, closed by a single slab of stone, of which one of the upper corners was broken away sufficiently to allow a man to enter. Inside we found a plain square chamber with recesses, partially filled with the earth that bad been washed in through the doorway. It was impossible to enter the chamber without breaking the long, thin stalactites which covered the roof and almost touched the floor.’ Ἵ found, nevertheless, that the tomb had been entered and completely robbed of its contents. The depth of the door below the surface and the great length of the stalactites, which must have formed since the tomb was entered would seem to show that it had been pillaged very many years ago. ‘This being tbe case, we concluded that other tombs, even if now covered with earth, had probably shared the same fate.’ 99 Edwin Porcher's draughtsmanship skills provided the basis for the publication, but the full extent of his work remains in a portfolio of unpublished views and plans, presented to the British Museum by him ca.1865.'” These include two additional views of the Northern Necropolis: looking towards El Mawy land and Wadi bel Ghadir near the Acropolis, identified by Adam Gabriel Hussein." I have studied the watercolours, but have retained the original Porcher Watercolour numbers for the unprovenanced tombs. DescriseD Tomas

Tomb A, N. 17; Fig. 8. Previously shown by Pacho with hillwash against the fagade, this is described as ‘simply a doorway cut in the face of the rock’, the entrance ‘embellished? in this case ‘with busts.’ Smith's observation ‘the peculiar form of the chamber depended on the soundness of the rock’ ἰδ ἃ reference to the irregular-shaped cubiculum with barrel-vaulted arcosolia beyond the antechamber in Loculus 1. The tomb interior which at that time was still buried in hillwash was planned by Porcher, who also recorded the adjoining Loculus 2 and its square chamber system. Referred to as the Sculptured Tomb’ by Norton who in 1911 cleared the interior (Figs. 34, 225). 7?* 755 © ?* *

‘Smith and Porcher (1864) Fig. 18; Maioletti (1930), 571 Tav. B. Smith and Porcher (1864) Fig, 38; Maioletti (19312) Fig. 8. Brit. Arch. Orig. Lett. Pap. LXIX (Jan-May 1861) fol. 375. Smith Mus.and Cent. Porcher (1864), 39. Brit. Mus.G. R. Dept. Porcher Watercolours. Porcher Watercolours nos. 113-114, Porcher Watercolour no. 123b; Smith and Porcher (1864), 29 Pls. 19, 33,

4l

Tomb B, N. 22; Fig. 8. Facade ‘perfectly plain, and contains only a small chamber’; interior description is based on that by Pacho of the frieze ‘covered with paintings’ and relies on the otiginal coloured engravings of his Tomb D. The subjects are described as a procession ‘composed of thirty-six figures’, one more than engraved and “The paintings on the opposite side to this have nearἐν disappeared and the other two are occupied by hunting scenes and a variety of games. James Hamilton who visited the tomb in 1852 gave a much more interpretative description. Smith and Porcher apparently did not plan this tomb; the frieze of wallpaintings lacks orientation and colour description, and was referred to as the ‘Fresco Tomb’ by Norton (Figs. 34, 235)." Tomb C, N. 66; Fig. 10. Range of tombs with unprepossessing entrances ‘called by the Arabs the Kenissieb’ overlooking the ancient road. Interior, planned by Pacho, represents interconnecting sepulchres and cubicula ‘128 feet by 68 feet"... In the interior we found a large marble sarcopha-

gus, and two marble pedestals’ with inscriptions CIG 5153 previously seen by Bourville in his

Tomb E and later by Norton (13.1; 1.4.1.2!

Tomb D, N. 83; Figs. 171-173. The forecourt and facade remained unrecorded, probably obscured by hillwash; the cubiculum was recorded by Porcher in two general watercolour views and the interior planned. The decorated arcosolia with sculpted shell motifs in their conches and the painted arcosolium by the entrance were described and the tomb was eventually surveyed by Rowe, who noted the position of the inscriptions seen by Pacho in his Tomb E (Fig. 237). Tomb E, N. 86; Fig. 27. Triple-level twelve-loculus tomb recorded by Porcher in a view and the interior planned. This type of tomb is described as ‘without chambers’, the loculi described as ‘sarcophagus recesses being cut directly into the face of the rock. separated from each other by thin

partitions.’ (Fig. 221).

Tomb F, Porcher Tomb 3, N. 226; Fig. 27. Rock-cut facade with twenty-three funeral bust niches above and around the entrance. Porcher's watercolour of the interior shows the chamber, originally with pairs of loculi on three sides, The loculi at the rear were cut away, indicated by two remaining cymatia, to form a cubiculum with three arcosolia. Sarcophagus lids are used as mensae and the conches contain ‘shells more gracefully shaped’; the tomb was unplanned. Obscured by hillwash at this date was the tomb mosaic (Figs. 224, 237).* Tomb G, N. 236; Fig. 27. Only inscriptions were published, and the tomb interior remained unplanned, The forecourt is an unfinished quarried area, with a plain facade and sill for the intended ashlarwork and entablature; the interior has two connecting sepulchres (Fig. 233). Tomb H, N. 398; Fig. 8. The facade was ‘originally ornamented by a colonnade of six pillars, 75 feet in length’. The hypogeum representing ‘The principal room measured 41 feet by 37 feet, with a height of 15 feet, and in it were found fragments of marble sarcophagi, with elaborate basreliefs’. It was then used by the Arabs as a granary, but in 1852 James Hamilton mentions that it 59 Hamilton (1856), 67-70; Smith and Porcher (1864), 29-30; Thorn (1994), 107. ?! Smith and Porcher (1864), 33 Pl. 26. ® Porcher Watercolour no. 117; Smith and Porcher (1864), 31 Pls. 17, 30. ® Smith and Porcher (1864), 32 Pls. 20,32. ?* Porcher Watercolour no. 95; Smith and Porcher (1864), 31 PL. 22; Maioletti (1930), 577 Tav. F; Bacchielli (1995b), 163; Santucci (1995), 53-61 Figs. 1-6. > Pacho (1827), 382 Pl. LXV,10; CIG 5166; Smith and Porcher (1864), 116-117 Pl. 86 nos. 30-32; Cassels (1955), 19 Pl. Xa,b.

42

was ‘inhabited’, and he was invited to see ‘marble boxes, the fragments of two very elegantly carved sarcophagi’. 1 was able to locate only the one originally recorded by Pacho (Fig. 234).* Tomb I, W.16; Fig. 4. Placed between two archaic tombs as an open antechamber loculus tomb. The inner facade, described originally by Beechey for his Tomb B, shows its entablature with ‘the colours as they still exist’, Photographed in 1911 by Norton (1.4.1; Fig. 220). Tomb J, Tomb of Altalena; Figs. 4-5. Smith and Porcher wrote: ‘we were disappointed to find the beautiful front completely destroyed, the whole of the entablature being roughly cut away, evidently for the purpose of obtaining the paintings.’ Footnote: ‘We were informed by some Arabs that these paintings were quarried out by M, Bourville.’ Hamilton commented: ‘their absence here is a disappointment to the lover of art’ (Figs. 18, 226).* This was rediscovered in 1994."

Tomb K, 5.186; Fig. 28. Temple tomb with a stepped base, one orthostat and four isodomic courses above; no entrances into the double-level compartments; shown with a flat roof (Fig 240). Tomb L, 8.4. Bourville partially cleared his Tomb D, its site now within the walls of the Old Shahat Muslim cemetery, and recorded the inscription on the large pillar stele, which Porcher showed in an unnumbered watercolour, noting it to be ‘8’10” high, 2’7” wide and 1’8” thick’ (Fig,

256).""

UNDESCRIBED TOMBS

N. 36, Fig. 36. Previously recorded by Pacho; shown as a view from across the wadi but unplanned by Porcher because of hillwash; eventually cleared in 1911 by Norton (1.2.2; Figs. 32,

221).

N. 89, Fig. 28. Several loculus tombs, one of which was altered by the removal of the loculus divider walls to form an antechamber at the rear, and the addition of a cubiculum with barrelvaulted arcosolia (Figs. 233, 236)."°

N. 90-92, Fig, 28. Forecourt with three rock-cut entrances to various loculus systems along the main facade. Cassels commented that N. 91 has ‘Slots for entirely built flank walls’, which seems a possibility, although the slots appear unused, with no debris in the forecourt (Fig. 232). N. 131, Fig. 29. Built facade to a chamber loculus system, altered at the rear by an antechamber with formae and side loculi. Beyond is a triclinium complex with three sepulchres on two sides (Figs. 228, 233, 241).^

N. 165, Fig. 30. Plain facade, the interior shows chamber loculi with two facing rows of five ?* ® ?* ?*

Hamilton (1856), 71; Smith and Porcher (1864),34 Pl. 27. Smith and Porcher (1864), 32, 36 Pl. 37; Maioletti (1931) Fig. 5; Stucchi (1975), 155-166 Fig. 137. Hamilton (1856), 76; Smith and Porcher (1864),36. Bacchielli (1995b), 163. Smith and Porcher (1864) Pls. 28, 36. Ghislanzoni (1915), 166 Fig. 82; Tomlinson (1967), 251 PL 46c; Cherstich (2002), 118-143 Tavv. 38:58. no. 1232. ?* Porcher Porcher Watercolour Watercolours no. 95 plan, no. 99 interior. ' Porcher Watercolour no. 89; Smith and Porcher (1864) PI. 15; Cassels Arch. Blue Book fol. 19, 75 Smith and Porcher (1864) Pl. 24; Cassels (1955),27.

43

entrances, a Late Roman arcosolium cut at the far end, and a cubiculum with three arcosolia at the end of two adjacent loculi (1.2.2; Figs. 229, 236). N. 178, Figs. 10, 45. Built facade loculus tomb recorded only in a view with Tomb N. 179, previously recorded by Pacho and subsequently ca.1915; eventually cleared of debris in 1947 by

Burton Brown as his Tomb C (1.2.2; 1.4.2; Figs. 39, 219).

N. 179, Fig. 10. The forecourt includes a rock-cut dwarf enclosure wall with chamfered coping, previously recorded by Pacho (1.2.2; Fig. 219). N. 183, Fig. 29. First record of this six-loculus tomb with isodomic-built screen as a water-

colour view; similar to Tomb E, described as ‘Capable of holding 54 Sarcophagi’, unplanned by Porcher (Fig. 220)."* N. -, Fig. 30. Porcher Tomb 2. Originally a galleried chamber loculus system, preceded by an antechamber, with inscription CIG 5152 above one of the loculus entrances.” Porcher made a plan, Watercolour no. 94, and included an interior view Watercolour no. 98 of the antechamber, decorated with a broad centrally-placed red ochre band of later date. Unregistered by Cassels, sit uated in the vicinity of Tomb N. 192, on the same slope (Figs. 46, 228, 243). Ν. 224-225, Fig. 29. View of two rock-cut tombs, each with four intended loculi entrances.

In Tomb N. 224, which has a built pediment above, Loc.4 was cut primarily, Loc.1 being secondary with, above the entrance, unpublished inscriptions read by Joyce Reynolds, who notes that the second lines probably contained the patronymics and the age of the deceased: i Lol*]’ Πόπλιος Pav L.c4..]a.

Year 70 Poplios ?

ii ᾿Αγαθώνεμος ToL...] Lvij

Agathonemos 2 Aged58

A block sarcophagus was placed in the forecourt, probably on a built dais. In the adjoining composite loculus and wide chamber loculus Tomb N. 225 the Ionic facade above the cornice

shows a dressed surface as if a screen was intended later (Figs. 219, 251).

N. 276, Fig. 28. Recessed rock-cut facade shown in Watercolour no.118, the central entrance surrounded by numerous niches of various sizes, the interior with a chamber loculus system,

slightly adapted later.”

N -, Fig, 27. Views of rock-cut tombs shown in Watercolour no.101 in the vicinity of Tomb N. 294; the plan of one was published, consisting of a cubiculum, facade loculi, a false door and a pedimented facade with portico for a square chamber loculus system (Fig. 223).* N -, Fig. 27. Two unregistered rock-cut double-compartment temple tombs A-B shown in Watercolour no. 119; terraced into the hillside below a row of rock-cut sarcophagi with thick tabular lids, near the floor of the valley overlooked by Tomb N. 362 (Fig. 239).” ?* "9 “ τῷ ??γι 58 7? ™ ™

Porcher Watercolours nos. 88, 121; Smith and Porcher (1864) Pls. 14, 24,35. Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ph. 3757-1781; Smith and Porcher (1864) PI. 25. Porcher Watercolour no. 116; Ghislanzoni (1915), 106 Pl. 54; Cassels (1955),28 PI. VIId. Pacho (1827) Pls. LXVI], XLVIILA; CIG 5152. Porcher Watercolours no. 94 plan,no. 98 interior. Cassels Arch. Grey Book fol. 71 Porcher Watercolour no. 115. Porcher Watercolour no. 118. Porcher Watercolourno. 101 view; Smith and Porcher (1864) Pls. 34 plan, 41. Porcher Watercolour no. 119.

44 W. 20, Fig. 5. First recorded by Beechey as Tomb C and later by Pacho as Tomb H. Water-

colour of internal facade shows coloured decoration identical to that of the unplanned Tomb I mentioned above (1.2.1; 1.2.2; Fig. 226).*

UNDESCRIBED TRICLINIUM RECESSES

N-, Fig. 29. Formed when an earlier plain facade loculus tomb was converted by the remov-

al of a dividing wall; Porcher’s vignette no.120 shows a lattice in red ochre and a frieze of five swags. Situated below El Mawy land, just south-west of Tomb N. 132 (Figs. 235, 241, 246),

N. 258, Fig. 28. Cut in the side wall of the dromos forecourt; Porcher's vignette no.121 shows bordered counterchanged panels of red and yellow ochre with frieze of swags (Fig. 235). N. 259, Porcher's vignette no.122 shows similar panelled decoration in a converted Ionic fa-

gade loculus tomb adjacent to the latter complex (Fig. 28) UNPROVENANCED TOMBS:

Most of these were produced as plans and internal views but lack external views, making identification difficult (Fig. 30).

90 Plan of a painted chamber showing a forecourt with two loculi entrances; another in the corner leads to a chamber, of which only the interior is published. This leads into a small cubiculum with two arcosolia and three floor graves. The tomb is thought to be located on the eastern side of Wadi Haleg Shaloof, close to the quarry behind the Kenissieh (Fig. 237). 91 Plan of a tomb with six loculi in a wide chamber with a inserted arcosolium, above which are five funeral bust niches. The tomb is thought to be located in El Mawy land, near Tomb N. 200, described as ‘Cut in the side of a quarry’; only the interior published, the antechamber be-

ing ‘27? feet in length, and 13 feet in breadth’ (8.39 by 3.96m) (Fig. 238)."*

92 Plan of a composite loculus and square chamber loculus tomb; in the latter one loculus doubles back underneath the chamber floor. This plan seems to represent the “Tomba della Cariatid? N. 228, where the interior is at present inaccessible

(Fig. 224).

93 Porcher Tomb 1. Described as ‘a detached tomb on the south-east side of the city , this plan gives the first glimpse of its appearance, described by Cervelli in 1811-12. Watercolour no.97 reveals the interior as a galleried chamber loculus system, with inscription CIG 5154 above one of the loculus entrances, first recorded by Cervelli and subsequently by Pacho; additional alterations show an annexe near the entrance and at the rear a late Roman square chamber with sepulchres. At the left of the rear entrance Cervelli noted ‘deux petits bassins’ which probably represent cremation niches. This could be the plan of a tomb in the vicinity of Tomb L mentioned above (Figs. 30,250).

δὲ Porcher Watercolour no. 124 interior. Porcher Watercolour no. 90 plan; Smith and Porcher (1864) Pls. 21, 41; Cassels (1955) Fig. 4. ° Porcher Watercolour no. 91 plan; Smith and Porcher (1864), 32 Pls. 23, 41. 7? Porcher Watercolour no. 92; Bacchielli (1980), 1 -18 Figs. 1-13. “© Pacho (1827), 132 Pl. LXV,9; Fadel, Reynolds (1997), 34-35 Fig. 1, now called ‘The Tomb of Aristoteles; Enquiries made as to the location of the inscription could not be fully answered, but it must be in the range of Tombs S. 4-S. 9.

45

96 Porcher Tomb 4, the plan showing two square chamber loculus systems flanking a single facade loculus, and a later burial chamber on another side of the forecourt (Fig. 224). Artifacts Smith and Porcher material, consisting mainly of sculptures and some small artifacts from the city and Apollo Sanctuary, with funeral busts from the necropolis, is housed in the British Museum, Greek and Roman Department: (Reg.no. 1861 7-25, 1-18; 1861 11-27, 1-163). Some of the sculptures were sent to Istanbul Museum as exchange items in 1871. Another statue went to the National Museums of Scotland, Edinburgh: (Inv.no. 1886-597). 1.3.3 George Dennis 1864-1868

In 1863 Lord Russell of the Foreign Office, also a Trustce of the British Museum, appointed George Dennis to the vice-consulship at Benghazi, placing him, as he wrote in a letter to Panizzi of 8th December: ‘in a position to explore the cities and cemeteries of the Cyrenaica, with the view of enriching the national Museum’ with his discoveries." Dennis's letter of 14th January 1865 stated: Ἱ intend to set to work in earnest, & to devote a month or two to digging at Prolemais, Teucheria, and Barca." The letter to Panizzi dated 10th June 1865 described the extent of his excavation in Cyrene: ‘L felt assured that I had found a prize — two virgin tombs, which I doubted not would richly repay my labour. It took me some hours to break through the massive doors, when I found that these were indeed virgin tombs, but to my great mortification they contained nothing beyond the skeleton, and red pottery of the coarsest description, not worth the trouble of removal, Sepulchres so well constructed, so carefully concealed, and so securely closed, yet containing nothing of value, or of artistic interest, convinced me that it would be vain to make further explorations in that necropolis. .. A reexamination of the ground in this very instance showed that there were vestiges of a monument once raised over these tombs, but now levelled under the soil: The published account gives additional information; the doorslab was teen inches thick’. “The tomb had been so well closed that hardly any earth had penetrated, and on its rocky floor lay the dust ofthe corpse in the place of the bones, with a group of small vases on either side of the head. There was nothing else!”. ‘some half-dozen pieces of very ordinary pottery’.. ‘Another sepulchre hard by, similar in every respect, contained similar furniture

ARCHAEOLOGISTS 1.4.0 Tomb Studies

Archaeological research started with Richard Norton’s 1911 expedition (1.4.1), after which the necropolis was neglected in terms of archaeological study (Fig. 32). The Italian IV Special Division under General Tassoni'® arrived on 21st May 1913, this event commemorated on a τὰ Porcher Watercolours no. 96 plan, no. 100 exterior. τῷ CSIRIL-I Great Britain, 49, 51 Pls. 33-34 Cat. πο. 85-86, 90. "© Mendel II (1914)Cat. nos. 387, 388, 619, 621, 628, 1111. "^ Thorn (1998), 563 Τανν. LI. "© Brit. Mus. Cent. Arch. Orig. Lett. Pap. LXXVII (Sept-Dec 1863). 7^ Brit, Mus. Cent. Arch, Orig. Lett. Pap. LXXXII (Mar-May 1865); Dennis (1870), 138, ‘© Brit, Mus. G. R. Dept. Orig. Lett. I (1861-1868) fol. 237. "^ Dennis (1870), 141-143; The precipitation of lime crystals found in the Tomb N. 405 Group was noticed to be 6cm thick, and was probably what Dennis referred to as ‘dust. This may indicate that the true burial, not found by him, was underneath the separator slabs of a loculus. Burial artifacts unregistered in the British Museum collections, "^ Gaibi (1928), 368.370.

46

plaque"? which has since been removed, on Tomb N. 196 (Figs. 43, 45 Tomb F). In InDecember 1915, because of its strategic position, the army cleared Tomb N. 171, ‘dei Mnasarchi front of the facade they found a colossal iconic half-figure, a marble pillar stele and a series of inscribed marble statue bases belonging to other half-figures (Figs. 9 Tomb F; 256). The mausoleum Tomb N. 180 may have disappeared at this time (Fig. 10). In 1925 the newly-formed Department of Antiquities cleared and consolidated Tomb N. 1, the burial artifacts being recorded on a series of photographic plates (Figs. 82-90, 95). Shortly afterwards Maioletti produced a series of three articles on tomb architecture, the first serious approach to this neglected subject since Pacho a hundred years earlier.” The hot ghibli of war interrupted further study in the necropolis, but in mid July 1942 a glimpse of a deserted overgrown landscape in the Northern Necropolis is given in a series of photograpbs taken by someone atmed with a Leica camera in the Deutsches Afrikalorps."” In 1943 the British Military Administration invited Alan Rowe, at that time Conservator of the GraecoRoman Museum in Alexandria, to make a report on war damage in the Cyrenaica and to refute Italian propaganda claims, made in July 1941, that the Cyrene Museum buildings had been ransacked by Allied troops. He described entering Cyrene from the south: ‘on both sides appear tombs and signs of the ancient city spread out on the plains. Lines of upright stones, carefully spaced, take the place of fences’ — the area now covered by the development of New Shahat.”” A few months later Ward-Perkins made some recommendations on the necropolis, which took shape in 1947 with Burton Brown’s excavations (1.4.2; Figs. 37-43). Within the space of the five years 1952-7, Chamoux's definitive work on Cyrene was published; "* parts of the necropolis were studied and excavated by Alan Rowe in four campaigns (Figs. 47, 164); John Cassels in 1953-4 initiated a classification of tomb types; and Richard Tomlinson studied the necropolis further in spring 1956, producing the only written record of a large number of tombs now mostly covered by New Shahat (Fig. 207)" Rowe’s assistant in his first campaign, Derek Buttle, also studied the architecture in Cyrene and included five tombs, three of which had been excavated by Rowe, in his doctoral thesis which he submitted in 1957 (Figs. 39, 43, 53, 127).”* During that decade these were the only Britons to study in depth and photograph tombs on the plateau. Since then the Italians have continued work in the necropolis; Luigi Beschi'” excavated two tombs in 1963 and restudied Rowe’s excavations (Fig. 157), Prof. Sandro Stucchi, realising its imminent destruction, made an extensive study in 1968 of the architecture in the Southern and Eastern Necropoleis"* and Prof. Lidiano Bacchielli concentrated on the tomb murals previously recorded by Pacho (Figs. 18, 293-294). Claudio Frigerio’s most excellent recording of Tomb 8.388 has clarified several points regarding false-facaded tombs, and work has been continued by Anna Santucci, who has studied selected tombs in the Northern Necropolis (Figs. 27, 235-236) while Prof.ssa Emanuela Fabbricotti and her students from Chieti University are carrying out work throughout the necropolis, including tombs along the Balagrae road and Wadi bel Ghadir.”” ?* Jowett Arch. Ph. 388. σι "Maioletti (1930), 568ff; (1931), 7148; (19316), 3216: τὲ Deutsches Archäologisches Institut (Rome) Photographic Library, neg. nos. 42. 362-42. 373. 7? PRO WO 230/166 fol. 51; Ministero della Cultura Popolare (1941), 8-9 pls between pp. 40-41. ?* Chamoux (1953), 287-300 Pls, VILIX. 7? Toml(196 i7), ns241-o256 Pls. 44-47; (1993), 129-144 Figs. 1-11. Buttle (1957), 193-198 Pls.n83-95. 17 Beschi (1972), 150-168, 186-196 Figs. 10-23, 40-50. τι Studi (1975), 7046, 149-192 Fig. 5681, 125-184; 1980), 2496 Bacchi (1976), 35516; (1980), LA; (1992), 5ff; (1993b), ff 7? Santucci (1995), 5386; (1996), 5166, Frigerio (1997), 51.

47 14.1 Richard Norton 1910-1911

Professor Richard Norton's expedition arrived for his first and only campaign of archacological excavation at Cyrene on 24th October 1910 and erected a large timber hut above Tomb N. 270 on the slopes of the Northern Necropolis close to the Mudir's stone-built house, where they stayed until their departure in early May (Figs. 34, 57). One of their major activities was the excavation of rock-cut tombs and sarcophagi, the extent of which is deduced from interim publications by Norton and others, giving an overall picture of the work, but Robinson’s contribution on the epigraphy adds more detailed information by giving co-ordinates for the inscriptions found in connection with rock-cut tomb facades and sarcophagus lids." In November inscriptions were recorded between the camp and the Acropolis, their locations noticeably described in walking time as: ‘on the lintel of a rock-cut tomb, about five minutes south-west of camp','® and: ‘about ten minutes west of camp, on east side of Wadi Zaghonia'.® Robinson mentioned that a marble block stele was found ‘in a tomb cleared by soldiers, just east of the camp’, referring to the expedition’s Turkish protection force.” By late January 1911 six tombs had been explored and another marble block stele and several inscribed slab fragments were recovered ‘from tomb 6 used as a stable. During this month another tomb, probably Norton's No.7, was being cleared, as on January 20th a marble slab fragment and two days later the sculptured stele of Antonianos the fool of Ephesus were found ‘in front of tomb used as a photographic dark room’, likely to be near the camp itself (Fig. 36). ‘The Norton papers were rediscovered by Jaimee Uhlenbrock through her researches in the records in the Classical Department, Boston University, and she has positively identified Norton’s unpublished Tomb No.10, by its inscription Robinson No.42, as Tomb N. 31 where 233 burial artifacts were found, suggesting a significant unrobbed tomb." DESCRIBED EXCAVATIONS

Richard Goodchild apparently had access to the Boston archives, as his papers in the Society of Libyan Studies collections contain transcripts mainly from Norton’s monthly reports." The following extracts include a combination of other related published evidence connected with each month's work. In 1955 Dr Sladden, formerly physician on Norton’s team, donated to the Antiquities Department in Cyrene more than 100 photographs illustrating the excavations." They were presented to Goodchild, then Controller of Antiquities, and some were found in his papers, showing the eastern side of the wadi with ‘east of camp’ pencilled on the back (Fig. 32). Other photographs of this excavation are published elsewhere. "© Mühlhofer (1923), 2 Fig. 1 ™ Norton (1911), 141-163; Robinson (1913), 157-200. Robinson (1915) no. 64. ^ Robinson (1913) no. 65; Doc. Ant. [1-2 (1936), 119 n. 125 Fig.80 7" Robinson (1913)no. 35 Fig. 25. © Robinson (1913) nos. 3, 5, 29-30, 34, 37. ™ Norton (1911), 160 Pl. LXX; Robinson (1913) nos. 7, 45 Fig. 6; Rosenbaum (1960), 125 no. 285 PL CI 3,4; Chamoux (2002), 321-325 Figs. 13. © Robinson (1913), 175 no. 42. "= SLS. Arch. Ref. 1989, 0030. 7" Sunday Ghibli no. 383 (May 1955),5. ?? SLS. Arch. Ref. 1989. 0021-1 ™" Goodchild (1976), 290-297 Pls. 90-91; Rosenbaum (1960), 3 n. 3.

48

The first of Norton’s progress reports in January states: ‘From the few we have worked over we have taken a quantity of fourth century and later pottery. The best are of fine black glaze with ribbed bodies and with wreaths (originally gilt) painted around the necks. One vase is of particular interest. It is a pan-Athenaic amphora, and itis plain, we have most of it. It bears the name of the archon Theopbrastos (ca.411 B.C). The scene on the reverse is a chariot race.” In February tombs cleared in the Necropolis included ‘tomb No.8 east of camp’ where an inscribed slab Robinson No.41 was found.” The February progress report is not available for study, but Charles Curtis, reporting at the beginning of March, described finding ‘several good terracotta heads and figurine fragments in Tomb 9, a terracotta of excellent workmanship with 200 small vases and lamps, including 1,000 glass pinhead’, which would seem to be the fruit belonging to a wreath.” On Lith March events were coloured by the murder of Norton's co-director, Herbert De Cou the epigraphist, whose body lay in state in Tomb N. 241 below the Mudit’s house (Fig. 57). After De Cou's death Norton continued his excavations in the Northern Necropolis, but a marked change is noticed in the description of cleared tombs, a name being ascribed to them, rather than a tomb number as before. An example of this method is the large sculptured marble stele Robinson No.11 ‘found face up in front of tomb on left of Fresco tomb, March 22 1911’, referring to Pacho's Tomb D (Fig. 8). Another example was Robinson No.25, an inscription found ‘cut in rock on right ofstairs leading to Sculptured Tomb, east of excavators’ bouse'on March 29th," while inscription Robinson No.26 is recorded on a sarcophagus lid, also ‘east of excavators’ bouse Norton's March progress report states that he has found several aniconic half-figures ** and ‘In one ofthe tombs, already rifled in antiquity, we found some 165 vases and lamps and some quite lovely figurines.” The first documented unrobbed burial assemblage was from Norton’s Sarcophagus No.1: ‘We also uncovered one small sarcophagus which was unbroken. It was obviously intended for a child but when we lifted the lid we found carefully packed away inside not only a child's skeleton but also the bones of six adults. Mixed with the bones were several undecorated but graceful vases and two bronze strigils. A good metrical grave inscription was also found.’ According to Jaimee Uhlenbrock, this produced a meagre 21 cleaned artifacts of mainly black-glazed Attic ware with a noticeable lack of associated locally produced ceramics. Photographic evidence shows the small Sarcophagus No.1 with a disarticulated adult skeleton filling the upper part of the case, giving the impression that it had been redeposited over the primary cremation burial and any associated artifacts, The skull faces a small inverted bolsal ca.12cm with the distal end of a tibia resting on it. Norton’s surprised description emphasises that the case seems too small to accommodate the remains of seven people and their grave goods, while Sarcophagus No.2 is a suitable size”

On April 2nd another inscription Robinson No.43 was discovered in the same vicinity as

= 7? ?* ?* ?* 7? ?^

Norton (1911), 159; Luni (1976), 260 no. 4. Robinson (1913), 175 Fig. XXX no. 41. Norton (1911), 167. Robinson (1913), 161-162 Fig. X no. 11. Robinson (1913)no. 25 Fig. 17. Robinson (1913)no. 26. Norton (1911), 160Pl. LXXTVe-d. Norton (1911), 159 PL LXIX. Norton, Boston Arch. neg. nos. 11. 591,11. 592, 11. 590; Uhlenbrock (1998), 107 Figs. 455.

49

those found in March ‘in second opening east of Fresco Tomb’ and on April 16th another sarcophagus inscription Robinson No.50 was recorded ‘east of the camp and close to Sarcophagus No.1 ** Norton’s April and final progress report stated that small funeral busts had turned up among the tombs,” and mentioned tombs and sarcophagi being cleared, with the finding of Tanagra type figurines and broken vases of fine quality, also lamps, pins and other small objects. One large sarcophagus opened was apparently unrobbed: ‘When we finally lifted the lid we found in the mud which had silted in remains of one skeleton together with several undecorated vases and one or two with stamped decoration.’ UNDESCRIBED Tomas

Although one gains an impression of the location of Norton’s 1911 work on the Northern Necropolis, it was only in 1953 when Cassels undertook his fieldwork that he identified the precise position of one inscription Robinson No.51, described as ‘over door of tomb at foot of rock-cut stairs on east side of Wadi Tabouna’, as Tomb N. 385 on the eastern slope in Wadi Haleg Shaloof^" This would imply that Norton's ‘fine circular tomb’ at the head of the wadi is a reference to ‘Tomb N. 1, which was later studied by Rowe (Figs. 34, 81-87). It is likely that Norton may have cleared some of the archaic tombs which overlooked the main excavations, as the Mudir was photographed in front of Tomb N. 4 where the hillwash appears to have been very recently removed; this tomb was originally planned by Pacho as his Tomb C and again studied by Rowe (1.2.2; Figs. Τό, 78). Another published photograph looks eastwards towards Tomb N. 17 forecourt, with dislodged sarcophagi lids in the foreground which remain undisturbed even today." The coordinate for the ‘Sculptured Tomb’ is based on inscription Robinson No.25, located during excavation near Norton's Sarcophagus No.2 close to the cleared loculus sarcophagus in Tomb N. 17 forecourt (Fig. 225). The tomb interior was cleared of its hillwash, revealing in the floor of the antechamber of Loc.1 a row of infilling blocks, indicating the outline of the truncated original double-level loculus system, which would not have been visible when Porcher planned the tomb in 1861 (Fig. 8). From the adjoining Loc.2 square chamber system which has above the entrance a group of sculptured figures, Norton recovered, according to Jaimee Uhlenbrock, vases and terracottas."*

The co-ordinates given by Robinson for two sarcophagi inscriptions provide further evidence to pinpoint Norton's excavations; these, Robinson Nos.22-23, were found ‘about 20 yards west of Fresco Tomb’ and ‘above and west of Fresco Tomb?" | found these on the western slope of Wadi Haleg Shaloof (Fig. 35), and when the distance quoted was remeasured in an easterly direc-

tion it coincided with Tomb N. 22 facade, confirming that this was Norton's ‘Fresco Tomb’. The entrance had been choked with ‘large boulders and billwash’ on Hogarth's 1904 visit (Fig. 8). In 1911 the entrance seems to have been cleared, but was still obstructed by fallen sarcophagus lids, and while photographs were taken of the interior and exist in the Boston archive, its epigraphy

? Robinson (1913) nos. 43,50 Figs. 31,36. ?* Norton (1911), 162 Pl. LXXVII; Rosenbaum (1960), 104 no. 197, Pl. LXXXIL2 : 110 no. 226, Pl. LXXXVIIL23 114 no. 244,Pl. XCIL3. ?* Robinson (1913) nos, 51-53; Cassels (1955), 19, 30,Pl. Xd. ?* Norton (1911)PL LIV. ?" Norton (1911)PL LXX. ?* Norton, Boston Arch. neg. nos. 11. 594, 11, 596, 11. 599; Uhlenbrock (1998), 107 Fig.3. ?* Robinson (1913) nos. 22-23 Figs. 15-16.

:

50

does not appear in the report.“ Further east was the adjoining Tomb N. 21, where in April an inscribed marble stele was found (Figs. 36, 256)? The only other tombs where Norton scems to have been involved are those to the west of the Fresco Tomb, where hillwash was removed from the facades of Tombs N. 23-25, the inscriptions having been previously recorded by Pacho (Figs 8, 222). The extent of Norton's exploration in the necropolis is demonstrated by his visit to the Kenissieh, Tomb N. 66, where he recorded an inscription and recovered marble sarcophagus fragments (Fig. 10)" and by a photograph showing the eastern slope with Tombs N. 201-208in El Masry land, where in 1952 Alan Rowe would explore and excavate some tombs (Figs. 109, 118)" Wadi bel Ghadir was explored, Oric Bates plotting the tombs seen on Smith and Porcher's location plan, annotating Tombs W.48: ‘Ionic Tomb. pediment’; W.16, evidently mistaken for the Tomb of Altalena: ‘Tomb with painted internal facade (now destroyed?) See photograph’, and 27,51, behind which he wrote ‘Opened some tombs bere. Had apparently been rifled before thely) became buried. Nothing? (Figs. 212, 215, 226). No signs of excavation appear in Norton’s photographs of this area although the interiors of Tombs W.27-31 have at some time been cleared?” Artifacts The archaeological material may have been stored in Tomb N. 270 next to the Mudir's house, the forecourt being suitable for the storing of sculptures (Fig. 57) which he seems to have abandoned on General Tassoni’s arrival (1.1.1). They consisted of twenty-seven half-figures, probably identified mainly from Dr Sladden’s donation of photographs," three funeral busts, steJai? and a small number of statues. The location of most of the artifacts has been unknown since their discovery, but a large sample of terracottas from the votive deposit by the ‘Terracotta Shrine’ survives in Boston" together with a numismatic collection” and Dr Sladden’s artifact collection in Swansea University Museum."

>= Hogarth (1905), 96-97. 2 Robinson (1913) no. 43 Fig. 31. 2% Robinson (1913), 195; Ghislanzoni (1915) Fig. 53. ὅν. CIG 5153; Robinson (1913), 195 Fig. 40; Pietrogrande (1930), 115-116 Fig. 13. ?? Norton, Boston Arch. neg. nos. 11. 560-11. 562; (1911) PL LXVIT; Cassels (1955) PL. Ila. 28 Norton, Boston Arch. neg. nos. 11. 662, 11. 665, 11. 675; White (1998), 176 Fig. 10. in brackets: TypeD. 17; Type F. 25, 27 (LXXIV. d),28 (LXXII. b); 24 Beschi (1972) equivalent Norton plate number Type 1.44; Type L. 46 (LXXII. a), 48, 49, 52, 53, 54, 57 (LXXIIL b), 60; TypeM. 64 LXXIIL d), 66, 67 (LXXIIL a); ‘TypeN. 72, 74 (LXXIIL c); TypeO. 82, 90, 91, 99 (LXXIV. a), 100; Type P. 113; Type T. 125 Heads 133 (LXXIV. c), 147; Uhlenbrock (1998), 106 n. 46. 2 Norton (1911), 162 Pl, LXVIII; Robinson (1913) nos. 11, 35-37; Rosenbaum (1960), 197, 226, 24. ?* Paribeni (1959), 39 (LXV), 157 (LXXIV, b), 121 (LXXIX); Rosenbaum (1960), 147, 171 (LXXVII, a-b). 2 Bacchielli (19945),45 Fig. 1; A variety of one hundred terracottas at Boston and those in the Sladden Collection are currently being studied by David Gill and Jaimee Uhlenbrock. 2% Goodchild (1977), 361-370 Tav. LXXIV. 2 The artifacts in Dr Sladden's Collection are given here with their museum inventory numbers (Inv. 962, 2. 135) and ‘equated with similar items in the Catalogue. Black-glazed wares Kantharos 26 (Fig. 313 M. 131), oinochoe (Fig. 378 M. 935), lamp 30 (Fig. 349 M. 650); Figurines Variety of twenty items; Vessels Pyriform olpe 25d (Fig, 394 M. 1071), small collared bowls 29a, c-d (Fig. 346 M. 605), lid 29b (Fig. 359 M. 720), unguentaria 24a-b (Fig. 325 M. 295) 24c-d (Fig. 348 M. 635), two-handled cup 25a-b (Figs. 365, 375 M. 778, M. 894); Miniature vessels Model vessels 23a, d, 25c (Figs. 324, 383 M. 268, M. 271,M. 989), unguentaria 23b-c (Fig. 324 M. 269); Model vessels Bowl 27a (Fig. 384 M. 998), ko. tle 276 (variant Fig. 416 M. 1229); Votive objects Four finger imprinted pallets 28a-b, d, modelled vessels — two finger 28c, single finger3, single bag shaped with pinched corners 20f, single cylindrical on square base 23g.

51 1.4.2 T. Burton Brown 1947

The appointment of Capt. T. Burton Brown as resident Antiquities Officer, B.M.A., Cyrenaica in June 1947 made him the first Briton this century to excavate in the necropolis at Cyrene.” In his report of 11th February 1948 prior to his demobilisation and return to England, he stated that work carried out included ‘Clearing and preservation of seven important Greek tombs in the vicinity of Cyrene’ and ‘Excavation of four Greek tombs and one Roman tomb in Cyrene and Toc72. Sadly, his field records and photographs are not available; I made enquiries of Burton Brown in 1988, but their fate is unknown, Proof of the existence of photographic records is provided by a print of the interior of Cyrene B, now lost, and a single surviving negative in Manchester Museum. His publication, apart from Tocra, presents the artifacts found in excavations in the Northern Necropolis at Cyrene, where he undertook to open two sarcophagi and remove debris from several Hellenistic tombs.” The value of his report lies mainly in the detailed account of what was discovered in sarcophagi Cyrene A and B. He also found two half-figures among debris when clearing Tomb C, a burial deposit nearby in Tomb N. 178 annexe, and burial artifacts underneath a stele against Tomb N. 192. Frank Jowett's personal notes provide further evidence of Burton Brown's activities in Cyrene by identifying his Tombs C and F and describing Tomb N. 84, pinpointed later by Goodchild who had been appointed to the Antiquities Department (Fig. 45). Goodchild wrote to Burton Brown on 30th December 1954 asking: ‘does your note in J.HLS. LXVIII (1948) represent your final report? I notice that we have in our stores [.....] material you found, and at Cyrene there are tombs lettered up to [H,] whereas your report only mention A,B, and one other. The materilal from] tomb “F” also includes, I see, a headless black marble statuette of that obscene Egyptian divinity "Min" (Fig. 49). . . We would particularly like to have, if possible, a keyplan to the tombs you dug showing the lettering you adopted, for identification purposes35 Burton Brown responded on 10th January 1955 with a misleading statement and sketch plan: "The note published in J.H.S. (1948) includes all the material found by me in Cyrene and Tocra. I cannot tell for certain what are the tombs (of which material exists in the Museum) lettered C to E, beyond saying that they are nothing to do with me. Perbaps they are the tombs investigated by Alan Rowe?... I find it difficult to be entirely explicit about the location of the tombs 1 dug without [a plan). But... bere goes: ~’ (Fig. 37)” In his plan he assigned the ‘glass published in J.H.S.’to Tomb F and omits marking the location of Tomb C, which according to Jowett’s notes was the source of this material (Fig. 45). In Goodchild's reply he, like Jowett, identified Tomb N. 196 as Tomb F; and Tomb N. 192 as the "Tomb excavated by me’. Two of Burton Brown's finds cards quoted by Goodchild mentioned Tomb F, and also Tombs G-H, of which nothing is known, Goodchild being unaware that Rowe had partly cleared his Tomb M3 in 1952 (Figs. 109, 116). The final existing letter on the subject is from Goodchild on 1st February: ‘I enclose a rough trace from the survey recently made by Cassels. I have marked the tombs which show signs of recent clearance, and which my staff affirm you partly or wholly cleared. The easternmost site, with graves 55. == ® ® ?* ®

Burton Brown (1948a), 78; (19485), 147-152 Figs. 1:2. Brit. Mus.G. R Dept. Lett. Book (1948) fols. 62, 62a-d. Barton Brown (1948b), 148-152 Figs. 1-2. Ant, Dept. Cyr. Lett. Book fol. 12. Ant. Dept. Cyr. Lett. Book fol. 1. Ant. Dept. Cyr. Lett. Book fol. 12.

52

lying on the roadside in front of a large but ruinous tomb, is doubtless that of your Tombs A and B. lt is site 172 on our survey. Further up the hill, just beyond the next valley, is the “tomb with forecourt’, and the steps you built (Site 196); and Lam told you cleared a tomb on the hillside just above it (Site 197). Below the road there is another tomb (Site 192) which you are said to have cleared. And further up the road, close to the upper road-edge, there is a vaulted tomb, rock-cut, with a vestibule of mosaic paving (Site 84), with a recent border of cement done by Minniti or one of his colleagues. I don’t think there can be any doubt that you did use letters other than A and B in your provisional marking of finds; for the two enclosed cards are surely in your handwriting, and they refer to E, Gand H. There can be no confusion with Alan Rowe's digging, as be prefixed all bis tombs with tbe letter M (for Manchester), and gave them a number‘, this referring to Rowe's 1952 campaign. ‘.. we shall shortly be moving all the post-war discoveries from their present store into another one; and I want to mark them definitively. THE EXCAVATIONS

‘The sarcophagi and tombs excavated in the Northern Necropolis were all close to the ancient road to Apollonia (Fig. 37). Sarcophagi Cyrene A and B were ‘cut in the rock where there is a slight sloping limestone shelf in a little valley with ‘a quantity of similar graves’ by a well-cut ashlar-built wall, two courses of which were unearthed. The sarcophagi were overlooked by ‘the remains of a large tomb, cut in the rock and faced with excellent masonry (probably Hellenistic) most of which, with the elaborate colonnaded and painted facade, has fallen’2” This seems to describe Tomb N. 171, which now overlooks the modern approach road to New Shahat (Figs. 9, 231). Cyrene A and B represent the furthest point away from the city to be excavated by Burton Brown; as he worked along the road he continued his alphabetical sequence to cover tombs which he excavated and cleared, as Frank Jowett’s personal papers attest. On this basis Tombs D, E, G and H should be Tombs N. 178 annexe, N. 192, N. 84 and N. 57, described more fully below. Burton Brown's artifact illustrations appear to be traced from photographs; I have redrawn these based on comparative material found later by Rowe. A summary is given below of all information known on the archaeology of Burton Brown's excavations, with a re-assessment of the burial artifacts: Cyrene A; Figs. 37, 44 on a north-west/south-east axis. The lid shows four acroteria and a

central plinth with rectangular slot cut in the middle (Fig. 38). Internal L. 2.315 W. 0.865

D.0.815m, contained two skeletons lying supine, head to foot, the skulls on their sides facing south-west, A wound from a sharp-edged, horizontally-held weapon, noticed on the front of one skull, was probably the cause of death. On one of the skeletons lay a pair of bronze tweezers. The pottery was either on or behind the skeletons, with several pieces in the corners of the grave behind the skulls. On the floor was a pile of grain ‘at the back of one body’, the first reference to organic remains being present with this type of burial^ 2% Ant. Dept. Cyr. Lett. Book fol. 12. 77 Barton Brown (1948b), 148. 7* Burton Brown (1948b), 148-149.

53 CATALOGUE OF ARTIFACTS

(36). Tweezers, bronze, ends ‘shaped like spoon bowls’ 31. Pelike, pinkish buff clay, partly covered by a slightly lustrous blue-black glaze, rim decoration unrec-

orded, H. 0.22 m. Similar example (Fig. 400 no. 1098. i) Oinochoe (Attic shape 5a), pinkish red clay, good black glaze, H. 0.10 m, probably identical example (Fig. 355 no. 684). 39. Oinochoe (Attic shape 5b), clay and glaze as n0.38 above, H. 0.096 m, probably like (Fig. 378 no. 935). 40. Hydria, soft pinkish-buff clay, unglazed, applied shoulder handles, rim decoration unknown, H. 0.115 m. al. Collared bowl, rough surface, pinkish buff clay, Dia. 0.132 m, similar example (Fig. 426 no. 1324). 42. Bolsal, red clay, good black glaze, two black painted concentric circles and dot inside footring base, a set of four impressed palmette stamps on inside floor of vessel, W. including handles 0.168 m, similar example (Fig. 362 no. 753). 43. Bolsal, clay and glaze unrecorded, probably as no.42 above, inside floor of vessel impressed circle, probably referring to rouletting, 0.02 in diameter, bordered by six impressed palmette stamps. W. including handles 0.184 m. 44. Bolsal, clay and glaze as no.42 above, handles similar example (Fig. 346 no. 600). Inside floor of vessel two concentric circles of impressed dots 0.05 m in diameter. W. including handles 0.156 m. 45. Bolsal, pinkish buff clay, poor quality black glaze, one handle, unillustrated. 46. Lamp (Howland type 21c, Broneer type IV), red clay, browny-black glaze, identical example (Fig. 358 πο. 698) which is also a common type. a. Lamp, similar to no. 46 above, previously unillustrated. 38,

Cyrene B; Figs. 37, 44 cut adjacent and at right angles to Cyrene A, with a similar lid showing a square socket on the plinth and lifting sockets (Fig. 38). Internal L. 1.830 W. 0.685 D. 0.711 m.

It contained one extended skeleton with the skull at the north-east end of the grave turned to the

north-west, the jaw dropped open. The artifacts were mostly at the foot of the skeleton with grain on the floor of the grave. A print of a photograph was given to Frank Jowett by Burton Brown ‘showing position of vessels, amphora and kylix 1947." CATALOGUE OF ARTIFACTS

48. Squat lekythos, buff clay, lustreless black glaze, slight incised vertical ribbing, H. 0.14 m. 49. Bolsal, clay and glaze as no.48, two painted concentric circles and central dot inside footring. Unillustrated previously, but size and des

ion similar to nos. 42-43.

W. including handle 0.187 m.

50. Deep bowl, rough browny-buff clay, applied horizontal handle, decorated with bands of dull red paint, 51. 52. > 54,

H. 0.133 m. Shape similar to vase for squeezing grapes from Rachi, but lacks the slot at the bottom (Broneer (1958), 32 PI. 14b). Oinochoe (Attic shape 5a), undescribed and unillustrated but similar to no. 38. Collared bowl, undescribed and unillustrated, similar to no. 41. Lamp (Howland type 21c, Broneer type IV), undescribed and unillustrated, similar to no. 46, Water amphora, browny-buff clay, two applied handles, decorated with bands of dull dark red paint, H. 0387 m. Example Demeter Sanctuary Inv, 251.1 (information Riley), similar example for decoration (Fig. 353 no. 669). Tomb C, N. 178; Fig. 45 A view of this in 1943 shows the entablature and forecourt encum-

?" Jowett Arch. Notebookfol. 123 left.

54

bered with debris.” In clearing the forecourt two funerary statues were found where they bad fallen from the top of a tomb.’ (Figs. 40-41)?" Frank Jowett recorded ‘Hellenistic Courtyard tomb Excavated and funerary statues re-set-up by Captain Burton Brown. The Manchester Museum photograph, which must originate from Burton Brown’s 1947 archaeological records, shows the sta tues in place above the entablature.”” On 8th February 1948 and 22nd September 1949 Frank Jowett photographed the facade with one of the statues, described as ‘Female acephalous marble funerary bust probably from ledge above portico of Tomb C. Larger than life-size.” They were still in place when Derek Buttle photographed the facade in the summer of 1952 (Fig. 39),?” but had been removed by the following year.”* The two statues were located in the Antiquities Department garden in 1990. Statue B is confirmed by Jowett, who helped to place it on the entablature. There are no known records of burial artifacts connected with this tomb (13.2; Fig. 219). CATALOGUE OF SCULPTURES

Statue A. White marble, Beschi Type L (Fig. 40) head and right hand missing, right arm bent towards breast, left arm across body, drooping hand broken at knuckles, clothed in himation which hangs over shoulders, across body and over left arm H. 0.80 W. 0.53 Th. 0.24 m. Statue B. White marble, Beschi Type L (Fig. 41; Ant. Dept. Cyr. Inv. 11, 131) similar to Statue A, but left arm bent upwards, broken at wrist, right arm across body, fingers open H. 0.75 W. 0.48 Th. 0.26 m (Beschi (1972), 254 Fig. 81 no. 50).

Tomb D, probably N. 178 annexe; Fig. 45. Burton Brown described ‘a roughly hewn room cut in the rock 10 the right of the forecourt of a finely decorated Hellenistic tomb’, which Jowett described as ‘Chamber on left of Tomb C excavatedby Captain Burton Brown’ (Fig. 39)? The deposit of pottery and glass was ‘all together in one place on the stone floor of the room’ by the entrance, ‘nestling just within the shelter of the edge of a small step down from the threshold’ and appeared to be intact. The burial artifacts were found in association with human bones representing at least twenty interments in a very confused state. The artifacts were cited later as coming from Tomb F annexeon the sketch plan (Fig. 37).2% CATALOGUE OF ARTIFACTS

a, Unguentarium (long fusiform), clay unrecorded, H. about 0.15 when complete, probable example (Fig, 325 no. 298) b. Lamp (Broneer type VIII), clay unrecorded, applied unpierced lug, probable examples (Fig. 331 no 348). c. Lachrymateria, thick heavy glass, three complete (illustrated), four in fragments. Examples found in Tomb XV at Mafluga near Benghazi (Ghislanzoni (1915), 28, Fig. 15, second ed.). Also others in light thin glass, one complete (unillustrated) and five in fragments. Tomb E, probably N. 192; Fig. 46. A rock-cut tomb with built entablature, below and to the

2 55. 22 ® + » © 5» 7?

Horn (1943), 198 Abb. 28. Burton Brown (19484), 78, Jowett Arch. Notebook fol. 14 right; 15 left Man. Mus. Ph. no. 3933. Jowett Arch. Notebook fols. 14 right; 15 left; 145 right; 137 right; Album Ph. 401. Battle Arch. Thesis Pl. 83. Cassels Arch. Ph. 35, 181 Jowett Arch. Notebookfol. 137 left. Burton Brown (1948b), 149 n. 15 Fig. 2.

55

west of Tomb F, cited by Cassels as being excavated by Burton Brown (Fig. 42)?" The forecourt has an enclosure wall pierced by an entrance, The facade has a central entrance which is a chambranle with ascenders in situ, similar to Tomb N. 401 (Figs. 91, 101). Against the facade is the built stepped base belonging to a broken, uninscribed stele monument, incorporating the forecourt step in its lowest course (Fig. 259). Cut into the false isodomic work of the facade, over and beside a later loculus entrance, are two inscriptions. Joyce Reynolds notes that the end of line 1 of Inscription i impinges on to the pilaster in antis. The whole of Inscription i is written on this pilaster in a different hand which is impossible to date, and as the existing inscription makes no sense, iti likely that the lettering continued on to the right-hand forecourt wall i vac. Leds’ Meng’ Πτολλᾶς

v. Ln

vacat

Inthe year 136 (A.D.105-6),

i TAPI

10th day of Mecheir, Ptollas

soM

(died or was buried), aged 80

‘Another letter may have been attempted at the

ΠΟΛ APO

C nac.

end of line 3, indicating an age of probably 83. Burton Brown found a ‘grave cavity’ under the stepped base on an east-west axis with burial artifacts mainly at the eastern end (nos.56-63) and a bronze mirror plate (no.64) to the west; there was practically no trace of human bones. In front of the stele base the forecourt floor had been cut away, forming a cleft. On the earth floor over the cleft was a lamp (item e), covered by an inverted dish (item f) containing a pale yellow-coloured substance. Fire-burning was noticed surrounding both the dish and the lamp. CATALOGUE OF ARTIFACTS

56.

Jug, buff clay, traces of horizontal lines of red paint. H. unrecorded. Similar example (Fig. 393 no.

57.

jug, probably a duplicate of no. 56 above, H. 0.355 m.

1058).

58. Flanged dish, rough buff clay, rim Dia. 0.415 m. (59). Lamp (Broncer type XXIV), undescribed and unillustrated. Dating based on a coin of Agrippina the Younger, found in a well (Corinth IV pr. II, 82, no. 459, Pl. X). 60. Artifact undescribed. 61. Lachrymateria, thin glass. H. unrecorded. 62. Lachrymateria, thick heavy glass, similar to those found in Tomb D above. H. unrecorded. 63. Small lekythos, undescribed but illustrated. 64. Mirror plate, bronze, with fragments of embossed case, possibly silver, showing floral and architectural designs, including a columned facade, W. 0.14 m. d. — Lamp (Broneer type XXIV), as no. 59, undescribed and unillustrated. e. — Dish, undescribed and unillustrated, similar to no. 58.

Tomb F, N. 196; Fig. 45. Rock-cut tomb forecourt and fagade known as overlooking the ancient road to Apollonia, photographed in a cleared condition Buttle. Burton Brown did not mention this particular tomb in his publications, plan he indicated ‘glass published in JHS found bere’ in Tomb D (Fig. 37). Frank ῬΡ Cassels (1955), 17, 28.

"Tasson/'s Tomb’, in 1952 by Derek but on his sketch Jowett confirmed

56 that this was cleared by Burton Brown, and in December 1954 Goodchild identified the statue of Min as coming from this tomb (Figs. 43, 220). CATALOGUE OF ARTIFACTS

£

Tuhyphallic black schist statuette of Min (Fig. 45). Head broken off at base of neck, body naked apart from a collar across the chest with a row of spherical beads at the neck, below which is a row of radiating pleats, finishing with a crescent shape containing alternating chevrons consisting of hatched lines, At the fringe is a cord from which is suspended another row of spherical beads. Upon the collar, suspended at top and bottom by a broad band in two parts, is a pectoral in the form of a mummified four-legged animal with a tail, the head damaged. A fragment of a false beard remains between the parted forepaws, which hold a pedimented shrine, containing a dot and crescent. A central groove runs down the body to the drilled navel, with the waist represented by a horizontal line above a pot belly and pubic area. The broken stump of an erect phallus is cradled in the left hand, the thumb above and the four fingers curling round, with the nails rendered by a pair of incised lines on the second and third fingers. The left arm, broken at the shoulder, had no contact with the torso, while the right arm, now missing, was attached separately by means of a small iron dowel. At the back a flat band runs the entire surviving length, Surv, H. 124mm. Across arms surv. W. 62 mm. At chest Th. 38 mm. At left hand Th. 45 mm. Dowel hole Dia, 8 mm. Navel Dia. 4 mm, D. 4 mm. Phallus Dia. 8 mm. Flat band W. 22 mm. ‘An incomplete example housed in the Cairo Museum Collections is the same apparent size and shows identical iconography; constructional characteristics with a pivoted right arm; and material used, as if both statuettes are from the same workshop. On the limestone stele from Tanis, Ptolemy IV Philopator and Arsinoé stand in front of Min, showing the accepted iconography during that reign 222-205 B.C., a double plume on a low crown on the head with the beard, the right arm portrayed raised, flail in hand, and the pectoral hanging from the neck (Ant. Dept. Cyr.Inv.4245).""

Tomb G, probably N. 84; Fig. 45. Part of the Kenissich complex (1.2.2 Tomb N. 66 Fig. 10). Jowett mentions ‘Northern Necropolis. Tomb with mosaic excavated by Captain Burton Brown in 1947. Interior. Greek Sarcophagus with Battle scene much damaged. Roman semi-circular niche with decoration above (F.P.]. - negative in Cyrene 1949),* Professor Bacchielli has now re-excavated this cubiculum and antechamber, but the later adjoining formae were left untouched, now published by Margherita Bonanno Aravantinos.”® The mosaic floor in the antechamber showing the cement border mentioned in Goodchild's letter was also uncovered, and Jowett confirmed in 1995 that its restoration was done by Antonio Muneroll and Luigi Carnenni, who were on his staff (Fig. 236). Tomb H, probably N. 57; Fig. 107.

In 1937 hillwash against the tomb remained undistur-

bed?“ but the tomb seems to have been cleared around and inside by Burton Brown in 1947 and

the fallen doorslab reinstated. Surprisingly, no reference to its earlier clearance was made by

Rowe, who in 1952 surveyed the tomb (Fig.

105).

30 Jowett Arch. Notebook fol. 16 left; 17 left; Album Ph. 385-388; Buttle Arch. Ph. 9/28; Cassels Arch. Phs. 30, 100-101, 135, 165, 242. # Cairo Museum, Room 19, Divinities, Case 255; BMC E. Sculp, 257 published plate with censored iconography. 28 Jowett Arch. Notebookfol. 145 left; Pacho (1827) Pl. XXXIX. 30 Bonanno Aravantinos (1998), 86-88 Tavv. I VIII ?" Bacchielli (1995b), 163 Pl. LXXVIII #9 Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ph. 2383;E. 2968. % Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ph. 29;F. 12; Maioletti (931) Fig. 11; Cassels (1955) PL. XIIIa. 55 Goodchild (1971) PL opp. 113.

57 1.4.3 Alan Rowe 1952-57

Rowe's previous archaeological career in Egypt and Palestine, culminating in his prestigious excavations in and around Alexandria, including the tomb complex at Köm-el-Shukafa, prepared him for a post as Special Lecturer in Near Eastern Archaeology in Manchester University. In spring 1951 he enquired about the ‘possibilities of arranging an archaeological expedition to Cyrene’, and his letter was answered on 10th May by an old friend, C.N. Johns, who had worked with him in Egypt at Meydum, where Rowe was Director, and had recently been appointed for two years as Controller of Antiquities, on secondment from the Ancient Monuments Welsh Office? Johns welcomed Rowe's proposal and told him that “Ar present none ofthe Cyrenaican sites are reserved to any expedition, though other enquiries are being made’. On 30th May Johns wrote: “Your proposal, contained in your letter of May 25th for a surface exploration of the antiquities of Cyrenaica with special attention to Egyptian and Semitic epigraphy seems to me a very suitable plan for this summer. . I would try and arrange that your party should take part in the clearance of one or two ancient tombs at Cyrene, on the condition that the finds should remain bere for the Cyrene Museum? and hoped ‘that it may be the preliminary to an extensive programme of excavations at Tolmeita, directed towards illustrating the Egyptian connection of the city in the Hellenistic period.’ Johns also wrote to Burton Brown that day, turning down his application to excavate at Cyrene, but offering him the alternative of studying the ‘abundant excavated material there; however, he made no reference to Burton Brown's previous unpublished 1947 excavations (1.4.2) Rowe's contracts with the Antiquities Department for the next three Manchester campaigns survive, with various conditions imposed, such as in 1955: ‘The excavator must subsequently fill in any deep excavations which in the opinion of the Department, might inconvenience or endanger the public, or hasten the decay of the ancient structure’, in 1956: ‘..the excavator should clear every visible monument within bis concession’ and in 1957: ‘The limit of the excavation to be cleared progressively from east to west 2" THE EXCAVATIONS

Rowe’s campaigns, according to the University, fall within his annual leave dates at the end of the academic year, although his leave for 1957 is unrecorded” First campaign

- leave

Second campaign- leave Third campaign - leave

Fourth campaign - accounts

‘mid-July to mid-September 1952

‘27tb August to 27th November 1955° ‘9th June 1956 for 3? months 10th June to 15th August 1957

These excavations and surveys were carried out over the necropolis in various areas in an attempt, in his first campaign and completed in the second, to select a series of tomb types. An inventory prepared by Rowe just before the second campaign was sent to Goodchild a fortnight be?* Thorn (1994), 101-118 Figs. 1-10. 2 Wright (1993) obituary. ® PRO FO 1021/17 Misc; Thorn (1994), 103 ® Burns Arch. Cyr. folder pr. 2 fols 17, 19,35. 55 Information: Margaret Turnbull, Secretary to the Registrar, University of Manchester (index card); Rowe Arch. Manchester cache lecture notes; Burns Arch. Cyr. folder pt. 2 fol. 30.

58

fore the expedition’s arrival. The list of items he was bringing is noticeably limited in its range of surveying implements: a list of the secondband items of equipment: — 1 Secondhand Corona Typewriter Type No.3 No.M.58948 scratched on it; also “RAR.” Value £10 1 Secondhand Camera, Penguin. No number on lens, marked “AR”. Value £3

33 rolls of Ilford F.P.3 films 2 magnetic compasses 4 small drawing compasses 2 magnifying glasses 2 typewriter ribbons 3 celluloid squares for drawing 4 wooden and 1 steel rulers 1 Fifty-meter tape measure 2 trowels 1 scraper A few technical books (history etc.) Record registers, note-books, carbon, typing paper, envelopes etc. Files of proofs ofarticles, pbotostats etc. [Herington is bringing with him bis own camera (very old secondhand one). It is Kodak No.2 Hawk-eye model B. No lens. Value £1 Our own camera does very good work.] Alan Rowe

An inventory of equipment used in the final campaign compiled by Goodchild on 30th April 1958 lists heavy digging tools, but, with the exception of one trowel, hand tools are lacking.” 8 picks

11 3 15 134 2 4 4

long-bandled shovels turiyabs (mattocks) large baskets small baskets large serandas (sieves) small serandas saucepans

4 pick-handles

3 wheelbarrows 2 brooms (1 only with handle) 1 trowel 2 chisels 1 water-tank 3 scrubbing brushes approx, 2 yards of sieve wire

4 shovel-handles

‘Alan Rowe led the only major archaeological excavation in the necropolis in the twentieth century, only ten years after the departure of the Deutsches Afrikakorps from Cyrene on 3rd November 1942. Manchester University produced the resulting two slim volumes in the austere postwar period, and although these were the first published account of the excavation of burials at Cyrene, they were limited in their illustrations and the amount of information it was possible to include.7* The results of Rowe's excavations are more fully dealt with in the text of the following Chapters ΠΠΠῚ, which contain the respective illustrations and the assemblages. Details of selected artifacts will be found in the Catalogue at the end of this work. 1959 Proposed Tomb-planning Project

During the first part of 1959 letters between Rowe and Goodchild discussed a proposed two-month ‘Tomb Planning Project to take place later that year, approved in principle by the Antiquities Department. Rowe’s letter dated 17th February states: ‘Some time last year I asked you

7 Ant. Dept. Cyr. Lett. Book 1955 Mise. ?* Rowe I (1956); IL (1959).

59

about the possibility of my being able to come to Cyrene (not on bebalf of our University but possibly another source) in order to make plans and take photographs of all the visible types of tombs in and around Cyrene, such work to complement that on the tombs now being published in our two volumes. This would of course entail no excavations but only, with your permission, of cleaning corners, etc, so as to get surface-level measurements — holes to be filled in soon after making, I could hire a couple of the best boys to help me make measurements, and clear corners. If you could kindly let me have an early reply to this matter I should be much obliged. I should like, as before, to stay at the Cyrene Hotel, and hope that the low-level arrangement in the past (for rates) would apply again. No doubt you could help me with the Customs as in the past.” His intentions, expressed in his letter of 19th March, mentioned hiring ‘Ali Salim’, who had worked with him three years before.”* Goodchild acknowledged this on 24th March: ‘as regards your proposal about tomb-planning at Cyrene. I may say at once that, in principle, we have no objection whatever to your proposal; and that in our view the value of the enterprise will be proportionate to the extent of the area over which you can extend your survey. As you know, there are large tracts of the Necropolis which have hitherto only been looked at superficially and the more tombs that can be planned the better.” On receipt of this letter Rowe replied on 3rd April, stating that he had approached the University Vice-Chancellor with the budget he had drawn up and a statement of the proposed work. These were supported by the Vice-Chancellor, who sent the proposals ‘10 London to a Foundation’. ‘So as soon as I get an answer I will send you all tbe details. In this letter he states: ‘I think I shall limit myself to the areas in the plans of Cassels, using his tomb-numbers? (1.2.4).®* Extracts from an undated provisional estimate for two months work include: ‘B.E.A. return fare London-Benghazi £ 92.13.0; B.E.A. single coach-fare to airport, London 5s; Hotels (Benghazi and Cyrene), accommodation, food, etc, plus extra for service; also cost of extra food to take out on long journeys in the vast tomb-area, Say (for 2 months) £ 198.0.0; Two workmen for assisting in measuring tombs, two months £ 48.0.0; Donkey and man (transport to and from work), two months £ 48.0.0” He intended to stay again at the Gebel Akhdar Hotel: ‘Accommodation: breakfast, lunch and dinner (inclusive rate) plus 10% service." The total for this section was £ 538.14.4, but an additional paragraph covering extra expenses which would subsequently be incurred in England, as well as other contingencies in Cyrene, doubled the overall total. The balance was to include architect’s fees for preparing final line-plates from field plans and making photographic prints for publication. This project never materialized, in spite of Rowe's plans, preparations and funding applications to various organisations, including the British Academy when Sir Mortimer Wheeler was President, probably on grounds of expense.“! Alan Rowe's intended project is addressed here by the author in Chapters IV-V for rock-cut and built tombs (Figs. 207-263) and Chapter VI for comparative examples (Figs. 264-286).

5» Bums Arch, Cyr. folder pt. 2 fol.37. ?* Ant. Dept. Cyr. Lett. Book fol. 121; Rowe IT Pl. 16c. 2 Burns Arch. Cyr. folder pt. 2 fol. 67. 2° Ant. Dept. Cyr. Lett. Book fol. 120. » Burns Arch. Cyr. folder pt. 2 fol. 47. ?^ Burns Arch. Cyr. folder pt. 2 fols. 50-51; the Jebel Akhdar Hotel, after standing empty for over twenty years, was demolished in the spring of 2000, ?! Burns Arch, Cyr. folderpt. 2 fols. 40-102.

60 LIST OF FIGURES CHAPTERI

Previous Explorations

Introduction ~ Beechey 1822 Fig. 1 Cyrene and its environs Fig.2 Cyrene ~ Beechey 1822 Explorers

Beechey's explored tombs based on Cassels’ classification Beechey's described tombs in the Western and Northern Necropolis Beechey Tomb A: (i) drawing (i) published PLS (ii) Beechey Tomb C. Beechey Tomb D: (i) drawing (i) published PL12; Tomb E fair drawings Beechey Tomb G: field drawing, originally lacking measurements Fig 7 Pacho's explored tombs based on Cassels classification Fig. 8 Pacho's tombs in the Northern Necropolis Fig. 9 Pacho Tomb F and Northern Necropolis tombs on the slopes of Wadi Haleg Shaloof Pacho's Kenissich tomb complex and other Northern Necropolis tombs Pacho's Western Necropolis tombs on the slopes of Wadi Bel Ghadir and another in the Southern Necropolis ‘Weld Blundell’s explored tombs based on Cassels'classification Western Necropolis tomb — Wadi Bel Ghadir — Weld-Blundell, 1894 Northern Necropolis tombs ~ El Mawy land - Weld-Blundell, 1894 Northern Necropolis tomb ~ Weld-Blundell, 1894 Photographed tombs in the Western and Northern Necropolis Limits of Cassels fieldwork in the Necropolis 1953-54 Fig.3 Fig. 4 Figs Fig.6

Antiquarians

Fig. Fig Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig.

18 19 20 21 22 25. 24 25 26 27 28

Bourville Tomb A funerary statuary, Tomb C half-figure and Tomb B frieze Smith and Porcher's explored tombs based on Cassels classification. Northern Necropolis ~ Wadi Haleg Shaloof, eastern slope — Smith and Porcher, 1861 Northern Necropolis - Wadi Haleg Shaloof, eastern slope — Smith and Porcher, 1861 Northern Necropolis - Wadi Haleg Shaloof, eastern slope — Smith and Porcher, 1861 Northern Necropolis ~ Wadi Haleg Shaloof, eastern slope - Smith and Porcher, 1861 ‘Western Necropolis - Wadi Bel Ghadir, Tombs W.26-30 - Smith and Porcher, 1861 Western Necropolis - Wadi Bel Ghadir, Tomb W.33 — Smith and Porcher, 1861 Western Necropolis ~ Wadi Bel Ghadir, Tomb W.48 - Smith and Porcher, 1861 ‘Smith and Porcher's recorded tombs in the Northern Necropolis Smith and Porcher's recorded tombs in the Southern and Northern Necropolis Smith and Porcher's recorded tombs on the easter fringe of the Northern Necropolis

Fig. 30 Northern and Southern Necropolis recorded tombs and Porcher's plans of others which are untraced

Figs. 1-46 a2) a2.) 021) 12.1) (12.1) a2 122) (22)

122) 122) 022) (123)

(123) 023) (123) 123) (124) (3.) (32) 132) 132) 132) 032) 32) 132) 132) (32) (32) 032) 032)

4) a4) Northern Necropolis ~ Wadi Haleg Shaloof, eastern slope -- Norton excavation, 1911 Northern Necropolis - Wadi Haleg Shaloof, western slope, 1952, showing area of Norton's excavations au) a4) Relationship of Norton’s and Rowe's Northern Necropolis excavations Norton’s Northern Necropolis excavations on the western slope of Wadi Haleg Shaloof a4) a4) Norton's cleared tombs in Wadi Haleg Shaloof and marble stelsi

Burton Brown's Northern Necropolis excavation location plan; excavations of Sarcophagi Cyrene A-B, 1948 Northern Necropolis, Cyrene A-B ~ Burton Brown excavations, 1948 Northern Necropolis, Cyrene C facade 1952 - Burton Brown excavations, 1948

042) 042) (42)

61

Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig, Fig.

40 41 42 43 44 45

Northern Necropolis, Cyrene C- Statue A Northern Necropolis, Cyrene C - Statue B. Northern Necropolis tomb facade — Burton Brown excavations, 1948 Northern Necropolis - Cyrene F facade 1952 — Burton Brown excavations, 1948 Northern Necropolis - Sarcophagi Cyrene A-B, inhumations and burial artifacts Burton Brown's cleared Northern Necropolis tombs and burial artifacts including Ptolemaic statuette of Min

042) 042) (142) 42 (142) 042)

Fig. 46 Burton Brown's cleared Northern Necropolis tomb and burial artifacts associated with stele monument. (14.2)

CYRENE Cbg

S Fic. 1 - Cyrene and its environs - Beechey 1822 (12.1).

]

51

Fio. 2 - Cyrene - Beechey 1822 (12.1).

Fic. 3 - Beechey's explored tombs based on Cassels’ classification (12.1). ‘Tombs Described. A: Altalena (Figs. 4-5); B: W. 16 (Fig. 4); C: W. 20 (Fig. 4) ; D: N.

178 (Fig. 6); E: N. 10 (Fig. 6) ; F: W. 18 (Fig. 4);G: N. 241 (Fig. 6);H: Temple Tomb (Fig, 240); I: Sarcophagus (Fig. 4). Tombs Illustrated. N. 14: PL11 (Figs. 243-244); N.

52: PL 12 (Fig. 245);N. 178: Pl. 12 (Fig. 219).

Note: ποι το scale After Bonacasa (2000), 161

Tomb ¢

Tomb E

Tomb G

| Mens. etdel.JetD

Fic. 4— Beechey's described tombs in the Western and Northern Necropolis (12.1). 1. After Pacho; 2. After Porcher.

65

ἹΓΙΓΙΓΙΓΙΓΙΓΙ

see

n EST HI Bu

gern

010. et

Fic. 5 - Beechey Tomb A: (i) drawing; (i) published PL. 9; (ii) Beechey Tomb C. (L2.1). ποῖ; 2.11. 3.1,

Ι Ü Note: Imperia measurements shown Del Beechey 1822

Mens. J et D 1989

Fic. 6 - Beechey Tomb D: (i) drawing (ii) published Pl. 12; Tomb E: fair drawings; Beechcy Tomb G: field drawing, originally lacking measurements (12.1). 1. Good Shepherd mural; 2. Peacock mural; 3. Peacock mural; 4. Good Shepherd mural

67

A After Pacho

Fic. 7 —Pacho's explored tombs based on Cassels’ classification (122). ‘Tombs Described. A: N. 398 (Figs. 8, 234); B: N. 241 (Figs. 57-60);C: N. 2-10 (Figs. 64, 67); D: N. 22 (Fig. 8); E:N. 8 (Figs. 1723); F: N. 171 (Fig. 9); G:W. 18 (Fig. 212); H: W. 20 (Fig. 226); I: W. 2731 (Figs. 11, 215); N. 65: (Fig. 9); N. 66: (Fig, 10);N. N. 180: (Fig. 10); N. 196: (Fig. 220; N. 48 (Fig, 11). Epigraphy. S. 10 CIG 5157A-B (Fig. ); 5.74 CIG 5157C (Fig. 228); N. - CIG 5151 (Fig. 16); = CIG 5152 (Fig. 30); 8- CIG 5154 (Fig. 30); 8. CIG 5163 (Fig. 11).

68

izlinlaizipear

La ‘Tomb N.17

TombN.55

n

^ lo

5

Note: plan not to scale Mens. εἰ del Jet D

Fic. 8 - Pacho's tombs in the Northern Necropolis (12.2). 1. Arcosolia; 2. Strigillated sarcophagus; 3. After Porcher; 4. CIG 5178; 5. Pacho Pl. LIIL2; 6. XLIX; 7.1: 8. LILA; 9. LIL2; 10. Stele;11. After Pacho.

69

Tomb N.38

3

] Noe locis Gove hambers fer based on Tomb F 1

Tomb N.52

nennen

Es

|

mt

Ι

| L

u

1]

Tomb N.65 ἢI

"mor

; τὰ

> Mens eel Jee

Fic. 9~Pacho Tomb F and Northern Necropolis tombs on the slopes of Wadi Haleg Shaloof (1.2.2). 1. After Gismondi-Dimakopoulos; 2. Conjectured site of Pacho's obelisk.

70

‘Tomb N.39 °

2m 0

sm

Mens. et del. 1 et D Mens t ἀεὶ Jee D

Fic. 10 — Pacho's Kenissieh tomb complex and other Northern Necropolis tombs (12.2). 1. After Pacho; 2. After Pacho; 3. After Pacho; 4. Tabula ansata.

n

Mens. et del. Je D

Said Fari Tomb A r

2m 0

E

FIG. 11 - Pacho's Western Necropolis tombs on the slopes of Wadi Bel Ghadir and another in the Southern Necropolis (12.2) 1. Naiskos;2. After Pacho; 3. Tombs W. 28; 4. W. 29; 5. W. 30; 6, W. 31;7. CIG 5165; 8. After Said Faraj;9. Battle sarcophagus; 10. Garland sarcophagus,

73

Fic. 13 - Western Necropolis tomb -- Wadi Bel Ghadir -- Weld-Blundell, 1894 (12,3).

Fic. 14—Northern Necropolis tombs -- ΕἸ Maury land - Weld-Blundell, 1894 (1.23).

74

Fic. 15 ~Northern Necropolis tomb, Weld-Blundell, 1894 (12.3).

TombC

Tomb N. 196

Fic. 16 - Photographed tombsin the Western and Northern Necropolis (12.3) 1. After Pacho.

Mens. et del.J et

5

Fic. 17 — Limits of Cassels’ fieldworkin the Necropolis 1953-54 (1.2.4) 1. Wadi Haleg Shaloof; 2. Wadi bu Turchia; 3. Wadi bel Ghadir; 4. North‘em Necropolis; 5. Cyrene; 6. Western Necropolis; 7. Eastern Necropolis; 8. Southern Necropolis; 9. After Cassels,

Fic. 18.— Bourville Tomb A funerary statuary, Tomb C half-figure and Tomb B frieze (1.3.1), 1. Louvre Inv.1777; 2. Bourville (1850) Tav. 1; 3. Transposed by Beechey; 4. Subject order after Pacho.

76

IN? iy

A

Porcher’s explored tombs based on Cassels’classification (13.2). A: N. 17 (Fig. 8); B:N. 22 (Fig. 8);C: N. 66 (Fig. 10);D: N. 83 (Figs. 172-3);E: N. 86 (Fig. 27); ἜΝ, 236 (Fig. 27); H: N. 398 (Figs. 8, 234); I: W. 16 (Fig. 4); J: Altalena (Figs. 4-5);K: S. 186 Undescribed Tombs. N. 36: (Fig. 221); N. 89: (Fig, 28); N. 90-92: (Fig. 28);N. 131: (Fig. 29);

Fic. 21 - Northern Necropolis -- eastern slope of Wadi Haleg Shaloof — Smith and Porcher, 1861 (3.2).

78

Fic. 22 - Northern Necropolis - eastern slope of Wadi Haleg Shaloof -- Smith and Porcher, 1861 (13.2).

Fic. 23 - Northern Necropolis -- eastern slope of Wadi Haleg Shaloof ~ Smith and Porcher, 1861 (13.2).

Fic. 24 - Western Necropolis ~ Wadi Bel Ghadir, Tombs W. 26-30 — Smith and Porcher, 1861 (13.2).

80

Fic. 25 - Western Necropolis -- Wadi Bel Ghadir, TombW. 35 - Smith and Porcher, 1861 (13.2).

81

Fic. 26 -- Western Necropolis ~ Wadi Bel Ghadir, Tomb W. 48 - Smith and Porcher, 1861 (13.2)

82

Sr Tomb

o

Tomb G

Watercolour 119 Tombs AB 2m 0 5m Mens.

Fic, 27 - Smith and Porcher’s recorded tombs in the Northern Necropolis (13.2). 1. CIG 5166; 2. Ins. 31; 3. Ins. 30; 4. Ins. 32; 5. After Porcher; 6. Inscriptions; 7. False door.

del Jet D.

83

Tomb K

Tomb N. 89

5

Mens et del Jet D

Mens. et del Jet

Fic. 28 ~ Smith and Porcher's recorded tombs in the Southern and Northern Necropolis (1.3.2). 1. After Porcher, 2. After Porcher; 3. Watercolour 121; 4. Watercolour 122; 5. Tumbled pillar stele; 6. Tri linium recess.

84

‘Tomb N.131

5 Mens. et de. Jet

Fic. 29 -Smith and Porcher's recorded tombs on the eastern fringe of the Northern Necropolis (13.2). 1. Triclinium recess; 2. Inscription; 3. After Porcher.

85

Watercolour 91 Watercolour 96

Watercolour 94 Note: densified May 2000, vicinity of El Mayland Watereoloue 93

‘Watercolour 92

i

Fic. 30 - Northern and Southern Necropolis recorded tombs and Porcher's plans of others which are untraced (13.2), 1. After Porcher; 2. Painted chamber; 3. CIG 5152; 4. CIG 5154 Ins. 27.

86

Fic. 31 — Norton's explored tombs based on Cassels’ classification (1.4.1). Explored Tombs. A: N. 17 (Fig. 8);B: N. 21 (Fig. 36); C: N. 22 (Fig. 8); D: N. 23 (Fig. -); E: N. 24-25, 31 (Fig. - F: N. 36 (Fig. 36); G: N. 39 (Fig. 10); H: N. 66 (Fig. 10). 1. Camp; 2. Mudir's house; 3. De Cou’s grave; 4. Shrine; 5. Acropolis,

Fic. 33 - Northern Necropolis - Wadi Haleg Shaloof, western slope, 1952, showing area of Norton’s excavations 041)

ase RON 2»—— MES E2

Note: On he orginal, Wadi Hale Shalof was dise NET toawhichsmileae sale atthe thansae thatshown.of Tombe Based on Stucch (1975) Tay. VI

Fic. 34 - Relationship of Norton’s and Rowe's Northern Necropolis excavations (1.4.1)

1. De Cou's grave; 2. Tomb N. 1; 3. Norton's “Windmill Tomb’; 4. Beechey Tomb E; 5. Tomb N. 13; 6. Mudir's photo; 7. Mudir's house; 8. Approximate site of Norton's camp; 9. Tomb N. 241 Beechey Tomb G; 10. Wadi Haleg Shaloof; 11. Tomb N. 57; 12. Ancient road to Apollonia; 13. Kenissieh complex Tomb N. 66, 84

89

Mens. et del, Jet D

Fic. 35 - Norton's Northern Necropolis excavations on the western slope of Wadi Haleg Shaloof (1.4.1). 1. Robinson 25; 2. Robinson 23; 3. cleared; 4. Robinson 43; 5. Robinson 11; 6. Robinson 22.

1

N Tomb N36 Tomb N.21

?

ET)

Fic. 36 - Norton's cleared tombs in Wadi Haleg Shaloof and marble stelai (1.4.1). 1. Antonianos stele; 2. Mudir's house Robinson 36.

i"

90

ἐκ- Bra rien

Cyrene Hotel Ul.

—_ Tomb N.171

d

|

^ 2 MEL S δα

Tees, Ss

y N

Gad pr Waning

€ QA

pon

had

eA

Chant

be

wu

and

wore,

ἢ

fear,

Gm) Tan. WE mp

mine u

BOR?

Fic. 37 - Burton Brown's Northern Necropolis excavation location plan; excavations of Sarcophagi Cyrene ACB, 1948 (142). 1. After Burton Brown.

Fic. 38 - Northern Nec

92

Fic. 40 - Northern Necropolis, Cyrene C -- Sta

tue A (142).

Fic. 41 - Northern Necropolis, Cyrene C - Statue Β{142).

93

Fic. 43 - Northern Necropolis - Cyrene F facade 1952 — Burton Brown excavations, 1948 (1.4.2).

94

Fic. 44 - Northern Necropolis - Sarcophagi Cyrene A-B, inhumations and burial artifacts {1.4.2}. 1. After Burton Brown.

95

7

Tomb F

Mens tdel.J et D

Mens. εἰ del.J «D

N TombN. 84

Note drawn ater descripti Margherita Bonanno Aravantion nosby

Fic. 45 ~ Burton Brown's cleared Northern Necropolis tombs and burial artifacts including Ptolemaic statuetteof Min (14.2). 1. After Pacho; 2. After Burton Brown,

96

‘TombN. 192

Fic. 46 - Burton Brown's cleared Northern Necropolis tomb and burial artifacts associated with stele monument (14.2). 1. Stele; 2. After Burton Brown,

11.1.0 Tomb Studies

The first campaign was mainly an exploratory one throughout the Necropolis (Fig. 47); the tombs studied were originally numbered 1-19 with an Μ᾽ prefix. Rowe partially excavated M.1-5, 9, 14 and 16, cleared M.6-8, 15, 17-19 and surveyed M.10-13.' Burial artifacts from these tombs have not been seen since soon after excavation; their surviving descriptions are given here in italics? The archaic tombs overlooking the western slope of Wadi Haleg Shaloof, surveyed in the final campaign in 1957, are included in this chapter (Fig. 67). I have arranged the tombs in the order of their distance from the city, and adhered to Cassels’ classification by compass points for the various parts of the Necropolis.‘ Only the most significant artifacts from each burial assemblage have been mentioned, as the whole can be judged from the illustrated Catalogue, presented in the order of their registration by Rowe.’ More detailed accounts of the burial furnishings appear in Chapter VII, which is referred to throughout this section (Figs. 287-305). Preserved among Professor Fairman’s papers in Liverpool University is Rowe’s 1955 Day Book, from which extracts have been quoted for Tombs N. 197, E.160 and E.161, which completed his exploratory work (1.7.2; 1.9.2). The book probably previously served as an alternative notebook in 1952,° as nine pages of sketches and notes at the back relate to this campaign, consisting of Tomb M.15 (11.5.1) and the so-called Tombs of Battus and Onomastus M. 20-21, not included here.’ The circular Tomb M.22 at Mghernes is referred to separately (Fig. 271), also a list of his sondage trenches and Tombs M.1-22, with relevant artifact numbers placed against those excavated. The final page is a ruled elevation of the position of the Demetria inscription in Tomb N. 83, which was subsequently recorded more fully in the 1956 campaign (Figs. 172-173). Rowe

could not have completed his first publication using only the information contained in this book, which suggests that other notebooks and drawings must have been in existence. This can be demonstrated by Tomb M.15, where the diameter measurement in the Day Book is given as 8.15 m, but is published as 7.95 m. His notes on the other tombs recorded during that campaign have not been traced at all, although there are some personal notes made by Buttle for his own thesis." The photographic records consist of 192 surviving frames, suggesting that 24 rolls of film were used, based on the annotated number given for the 1955 campaign mentioned below. These represent general views of tombs before and after clearance, but there are no formal photographs ? ? ? τ

Rowe I, 675 I, 28 note, Rowe Il, 27-29, 32. Rowe Il, 6-7 Figs. IV, VIILIX. Cassels (1955), 26-43 Figs. 3-6 LL » Artifact Catalogue Figs. 306-426. Frontispiece; Fairman Arch. Rowe's 1955 Day Book; Thorn (2000b) forthcoming. ? Rowe I, 46 Figs. LIT Pl, 2b; Santucci (1998), 23. * Buttle Arch. folio of architectural drawings and notes.

100

of particular archacological features discovered, such as burial artifacts in situ,’ and the artifacts were recorded displayed on the steps of the Antiquities Department by Derek Buttle.”” The written records for the second campaign consist solely of fifty numbered pages forming Rowe's 1955 Day Book, which may be the book shown with two folders on the step of Tomb M. 3 in a photograph probably taken on 29th September." This begins on ‘3/9/55’ with his notes on the excavation of Tombs E.160-161, giving their magnetic orientation, followed by numbered paragraphs containing information on the areas being worked, adopting a provisional alphabetical list of artifacts found on the same lines as Howard Carter's Handlist, with sketch plans of significant details.” At the end of the day is a full résumé of work done, which may include more elaborate sketches (Figs, 130-132). The handwriting is not that of Rowe and is more likely that of his assistant CJ. Herington, but the following Tomb M3 is written in Rowe's hand following the same format." If one compares the published account of Tombs E.160-161 with entries in the Day Book, it becomes apparent that the description is the same but the dimensions of the main burial chamber have originated from another source. The Day Book does not include a clear description of Rowe's libation slabs and their associated miniature vessels (Fig. 117),! and also demonstrates that it is impossible to prepare a line drawing from the notes it contains. The Day Book also contains annotations of the rolls of films and their particular frames taken for each day's work. This apparently consisted of 64 frames taken on eight rolls, some of which, according to Rowe, had been ‘destroyed’, and only eight random negatives have been found.” There is a collection of 25 uncatalogued frames which Rowe did not annotate in his Day Book, representing mainly views of the clearing of Tomb M.3 forecourt and the adjoining Tomb N. 198-A debris and rock-cut sarcophagus (Figs. 109, 113-114). It seems that four rolls of film were used, the last devoted entirely to post-excavation processing of artifacts, as demonstrated by the three photographs of the aniconic head taken on a wooden table ‘before cleaning ^ Two other frames belonging to this series show burial artifacts from Tomb M3 Loc.2 and the miniature vessels found in Slab Y from Rowe's Tomb N. 198-A." NORTHERN NECROPOLIS

Rowr's SONDAGE TRENCHES 1-3, TomBs M.1, 17-19; Cassets N.380-383 11.1.1 Historical Background

Since ancient Islamic times a track has passed as a caravan route across the head of Wadi bu Turchia, appearing in the background of various views of the Apollo Sanctuary, bordered by trees in 1913; five years later its alignment was marked by two telegraph poles, where discoveries ? The archacological photographs are based on negatives and prints used here for the following: Figs. 49, 53-54, 62-63, 110-115, 119, 126, 128-129, 138-139, 145-148, 152-153, 155-156, 159-162. © This spool, found in the Rowe Arch. Manchester cache, represents Buttle’s spool number 14 which was missing from the Buttle photographic archive and has now been reinstated. ™ Rowe Arch. Ph. 225; the folders on the step may have contained the master architectural drawings on half-imperial

sheets of cartridge paper, as the site plan of Tombs N. 197-198A, B survives as two dyeline copies at a metric scale of 1:50, taken from a copy on tracing paper.

? ? '* © *

Murray and Nuttall (1963), 1-19; Fairman Arch. Rowe's 1955 Day Book fols. 1-42. Fairman Arch. Rowe's 1955 Day Book fols, 43-48. Rowe Il, 5-6. Rowe Il, 5 n.6. Man.Mus. display label, Man.Guard. (May 8th 1956), 4. Post-excavation photographs show it cleaned (Rowe II Pl.

229.

? Rowe II Pls3c, db.

™ Beechey (1828) PL 8; Smith and Porcher (1864) PI. 48.

101

were made in 1925 when the new approach road to Shahat was constructed.” By 1938 the road had again been altered and extended to its present configuration (Fig. 48). Rowe's first campaign recorded three monuments, M.17-19, and excavated another, M.1. These were studied soon after by Cassels, who renumbered them as N.380-383 and included ten others within the vicinity.” A low wall was later built behind Tombs N.381-382, which in the summer of 1996 was heightened and extended so that it now runs round in front of the N.383 stelai group, forming a corral and concealing them from view (Fig. 53). 11.1.2 Archaeological Work

The 1925 road construction involved digging a cutting in the hillwash close to the rock face, leaving a bank of spoil between Tombs N.381-383. In the process of excavation, discoveries were made and reported by Maioletti: "Queste tombe, ritenute per quelle dei primi coloni, erano delle semplici urne di terracotta ad anfora e a tegole, contenenti le ceneri e qualche osso residuale del deSunto, ed erano coperte ed elevate sopra terra da tre o quattro blocchi a piramide tronca, sormontata da una stele semplicissima e con qualche avanzo policromato.” Rowe dug three sondage trenches within the same area, (Fig. 49) but only the location of Trench 1 is known, approx. 7.00 m north-east of Tomb N.380, ‘S.W. of Rest House, Cyrene, on corner of road? In Trench 1 a long rectangular limestone block was found just below ground surface on a north-south axis, thought by Rowe to be an uninscribed archaic stele (Fig. 50)" Underneath were pieces of bent metallic sheeting and a grave.” From Trench 2 a large terracotta tile ‘was apparently the covering of a disturbed child burial. Fragments incapable of restoration — were also found with M.11. They may have been the sides of a coffin’ The burial artifacts discovered had sustained some degree of damage. A small jar without handles ‘contained frags of incinerated ones’ and a ‘juglet with plaster stopper’ (Assem. II; Fig. 306 nos. 6-30).” The modest number of artifacts registered may indicate that Trenches 1 and 3 were small in size (Assem. I, III; Figs. 306-307 nos. 1-5, 31-36)” The stepped pedestal base, Rowe’s Tomb M.1, Cassels Tomb N. 383 monument 4 was cleared of debris and the interior excavated (Fig. 56). A variety of artifacts were found which Rowe realised ‘must have been intrusive ones’ (Assem. IV; Figs. 54, 307 nos. 37-53).”

11.1.3 Structural Description ‘The monuments consist of three main types (VII.9.1-3), stele monuments, stepped stele bases and pedestal monuments (Figs. 55-56), and all were reassembled after 1925." Three, designated here as Maioletti A-C, had been rebuilt on the lower outer bend of the road and were in posiν᾽ ® ® ® > ® » κι ® ® ? »

Oliverio (1931), 144 Pl. 52; Pernier (1935),3, 5 Figs. 2,6, Hom (1943) Abb. 9 Rowe I Figs. VIII, IX; Cassels Arch. Phs. 176, 178, 255; Cassels (1955), 3, 30, Maioletti (19318), 714. Fairman Arch. Rowe's 1955 Day Book, list; Rowe I, 21. Rowe Arch. Phs. 141-142, 163-247; Buttle Arch. Ph.8/1; Rowe I, 4 n.1 Buttle Arch. Phs. 8/23. Buttle Arch. Notebook. Rowe Arch. Phs. 277-279; Rowe Il, 28-29. Rowe Arch. Phs. 275-276; Rowe II, 28-29. Rowe Arch. Phs. 245.246, 282-283; Rowe I, 21 Fig. IX. Bertareli (1929) map opp. 489.

102

tion before Tomb N. 382 was re-erected shortly afterwards." They were moved again and combined with Tomb N. 383 as monuments 6-8 to make way for the road to be extended. Two stepped bases, Maioletti D-E, remain in situ, giving the original ground surface as 2 m above the present road at this point. Tomb N. 381 monument 2 is level with the modern road surface and projects into it, with the mortar roadside kerb, serving as a rain channel, running round the back, incorporating the upper part of the partially buried stepped base of Tomb N. 381 monument 1, while monument 2 has been reassembled as a composite (Fig. 51). Tomb N. 382 also projects into the road, apparently riding the top of the kerb (II.1.4; Fig. 52). Derek Buttle’s 1952 photo shows the N. 383 group of monuments 1-10 as they appeared prior to clearance and excavation

(Fig. 53). The stele shaft shown reassembled earlier on Maioletti A as monument 7 was absent by 1952. It may be the nearby shaft, monument 9, reused as a second world war grave slab, lying on the spoil heap from the road cutting, but I feel it is more likely to represent a monument which can be seen in a photograph taken in 1937, and stood by the ancient road at Bab Sousa (Fig. 54).

Discarded stepped stele base monument 10, placed upside-down on monument 5, is an unrelated clement.” The lower half of the surviving pedestal to monument 1, Rowe's M.19, has been inverted and turned round 90°, recorded by Rowe in this arrangement; the original order is suggested in the illustration (Fig. 56).*

11.1.4 Observations

The location of Tombs N. 381 monuments 1-2 and N. 382, reassembled by the modern road kerb, would scem the reason why Rowe did not mention them, as he must have realised they were secondary, a fact confirmed by Frank Jowett’s photo of Tomb N. 382, found in 1995 among some of Rowe's papers in the History Department Map Room at the University of Manchester (Fig 52) Tomb N. 381 monument 1 may be in situ, and the buried stepped base is compatible with its stele, as the mortice and tenon are an original match. Cut in the sculptured panel of Tonic Tomb N. 17 is a similar pedestal stele without a stepped base, which could be contemporary (Figs. 254, 259). A small stepped stele base such as Maioletti D could be placed on a block containing a cremation, and Tomb N. 383 monument 10 compares with examples found in Rowe's Enclosure N. 82-23 which may have come from sarcophagus plinths (Fig. 258). Pedestal monuments are similar to those used for statue bases, examples coming from the Artemision and from the Agora, Portico B.5,” recalling similar monuments at Sciatbi and Hadra Cemeteries in Alexandria and Tipasa Tomb F in Numidia (Figs. 245, 274-275). > Maioletti (19312) Fig. 2. ® Jowett Arch. Notebook fol. 11 Ph. A. 69 Album Ph. 449 dated 8.5.1949. » Jowett Arch. Notebook fol. 45 Ph.E. 43 Album Ph. 450 dated 8.5.1949. * Maioletti (19312) Fig. 2; Buttle Arch. Ph. 7/17 Thesis Pl. 91; Alternatively, monument 9 may represent the stele shown at Bab Sousa near the Kenissich in DAI neg. no. 84.3705. » Jowett Arch. Notebook fol. 38 Ph. D. 44 AlbumPh. 451 dated 24.9.1949. # Rowe Arch. Phs. 143-146, 244; Rowe I Fig, VIII » Rowe Arch. Ph. 243. ? Rowe Il,24 » Pernier (1935) Fig. 30a; Stucchi (1965), 227-228 Fig. 142. © Tipasa Necropolis, Algeria, Tomb F; Lancel (1970), 157, 198 Figs. 2, 7, 50-51.

103 Rowe’s Toms M.7, Cassers N. 241 11.2.1 Historical Background

The tomb is situated slightly north-west of Tomb N. 14, on the eastern edge of a small wadi in an area of sarcophagi buried in hillwash where, just to the south-west above Tomb N. 240, two block stelai in situ project above the surface (Figs. 57, 252, 257)" Beechey’s original unfinished field drawings of the tomb, done in May 1822, are without any annotation (Fig. 6). In 1825 Pacho for his Tomb B recorded the interior south wall and an inaccurate copy of the Good Shepherd mural in Arcosolium 7 and gave a misleading description (1.2.2). The Mudir's house, the only Ottoman building to exist in Cyrene, situated immediately over this tomb, was built after 1895, when Weld-Blundell photographed various rock-cut tombs in the necropolis (1.2.3)“ In 1904 Hogarth, Director of the British School at Athens, stayed the night in the house, declining the offer to share with his colleague and their host the latter's iron bedstead.” Norton erected a large timber hut above the neighbouring Tomb N. 270 as the ‘carp’ for his 1911 excavations in Wadi Haleg Shaloof (Figs. 34, 57)," and the murdered De Cou eventually lay in state in Tomb N. 241 below the house (IL3.1; Fig. 60). In 1913 Halbherr, who explored Cyrenaica, called the Mudir's house the only building in Cyrene, apart from the Zawaiyah.“ Rowe surveyed the tomb interior and in Arcosolium 7 the mural it contained was wrongly assumed to be one of a series of ‘Frescoes partly covered by whitewash; the opportunity to correct Pacho’s engraving of the Good Shepherd was missed and the mural remained unpublished” until recently, when this was fulfilled by Professor Bacchielli, who also replanned the cubiculum (Fig. 293). 11.2.2 Archaeological Work

When the Mudir's house was built, an enclosure of sarcophagi was destroyed and any archaeological levels and hillwash removed, although Norton's 1911 expedition found an inscribed marble block stele ‘from the house of the Mudir , but the circumstances of its discovery are unknown (Figs. 36, 256). 11.2.3 Structural Description Mudir's house H. 4.09 L. 9.75, 8.73 W. 4.70, 4.45, still occupied in 1981 and now in ruins,

its flat roof collapsed, Foundations at the south-west corner projecting as an offset show the truncated remains of two rock-cut sarcophagus cases which may indicate a destroyed enclosure. It consists of two rooms L. 4.55 and L. 2.32, W. 2.66 m with central communicating doorway, and

shows externally various alterations and infilling of windows and doors. The tomb below was ap-

© Stucchi (1975) Tav. VI © Brit. Mus. GR. Dept. Rep. Weld-Blundell Ph. 4. © Hogarth (1905), 96 Pl. opp. 104. “ Norton (1911), 153; Mühlhofer (1923), 2 Fig. 1. © Pernier (1935), 281-282 Fig. 59. Goodchild (1976), 295; Russell (1993), 6. © Rowe Arch. Phs. 31.38, 70:71; Rowe I, 24-26 Fig. XII; (1952b), 10; Thorn (1994), 107. © Bacchielli (1993a), 95-97 Figs. 18-23; (1993b), 3-21 Tav. LIL. © Norton (1911), 153 Pl. LIV; Robinson (1913), 171-2 Fig, 26 no36; Doc. Ant. II-1 (1933), 112 Cirene81 Tav. XXVIII Fig. 45 n0.89.

104

parently used in addition to the house, as it has ἃ courtyard surrounded by a boundary wall with, on the eastern side leading down from the house, a staircase built over a lidless sarcophagus, with two ancient boundary stones reused in its core. On the opposite side, this wall was built over the projection and two other sarcophagus cases, a lid fragment to one of which is incorporated in the wall thickness (Fig. 57). Tomb N. 241 Forecourt L. 5.96 W. 4.41 m, open to the north. At the south-west corner (Fig.

58) a projection incorporates a raised sarcophagus blank, against which are two completed rockcut sarcophagus cases, and at the north-eastern side a row of rock-cut sarcophagi, continuing eastwards to Tomb N. 270, form the northern limits of the forecourt (Fig. 57). Fagade H. 2.40 m shows scars where blocks have been removed. In the facade above the projection a quarryman’s channelling trench may represent the remaining corner of a sarcophagus case, now incorporated into the foundations of the Mudir's house. The tomb entrance is off-centre, flanked by two round-headed slit windows with rainwater grooves over the openings (Fig. 58). Cubiculum H. 2.89 L. 5.87-5.77 W. 5.08 m. The walls were primarily dressed with a claw chisel, the finer details being cut with a drove chisel (Fig. 60). The entrance shows pivot holes for a wooden door and five steps lead down to the chamber floor 0.89 m below, flanked by two Formae 1 and 8 (Figs. 292, 299). On the north wall are round-headed embrasures to slit windows, and above Forma 1 over the cubiculum step is traced out a semi-circle for an intended barrel-vaulted arcosolium recess. The chamber is divided into bays by plain pilasters, the lower stage with bevelled base and capital H. 1.26 W. 0,36-0.39 m topped by a dwarf cavetto impost capital H. 0.20 m, supporting the upper stage of the pilaster with a smaller shaft H. 0.90 W. 0.19 m reaching the ceiling offset. The east and west walls each have two bays for barrel-vaulted arcosolia (Fig. 60). Arcosolia 2-3 each contain one burial case, but Arcosolium 5 is doubled with 6. The vault of Arcosolium 7 differs by being a conch, with a decorative mural of twelve fish surrounding a displaying peacock above a bow! filled with a cluster of flowers. The case shows the Good Shepherd with seven sheep (Fig. 293). The spandrels between the arcosolia each contain a centrally-placed four-petalled rosette in relief, not repeated in the comer spandrels. The south wall, facing the entrance, has more claborate arcading than its counterparts, with Arcosolium 4 occupying a central position (Figs. 59, 299). The case is decorated with garlands in relief, two human heads and two bucrania. The pilasters’ bevelled capitals continue as a fillet around the recess above the case, and on this bevel rests the umbo of a scallop shell in relief, the outer edge of the mantle reaching the crown of the arch just below its border wreath; the spandrels show rosettes. Arcosolium 4 is flanked by roundheaded Niches 9-10, Below these niches are amphorae in relief with pronounced bases, each resting on a three-lobed acanthus leaf (Fig. 300). 11.2.4 Observations

Both Tombs N. 241 and N. 270 are located in open quarried areas whose floors and quarryfaces were intended for Hellenistic tombs which were never cut, based on the evidence of a continuous lower row of rock-cut sarcophagi forming a lateral boundary (Fig. 57). The tomb arrangement is similar to that of Tomb N. 83 (Figs. 172-173), and significantly different is Arcosolium 4 which resembles a marble garland sarcophagus (Fig. 234). The tomb is primary and has not had extensive alterations, although Formae 1 and 8 are probably the latest inserted burials, a feature also noticed in Tomb N. 83. The small window embrasures also occur in Tombs N. 5 and N. 165, which are similarly associated with arcosolia (Figs. 75, 237).

‘A structural sequence of events has been isolated:

105

Phase Classical-Hellenistic 1 Open quarried face with Hellenistic rock-cut sarcophagi on floor (Fig. 57). Roman 2 Cutting of Tombs N. 241, N. 270 as cubicula with barrel-vaulted arcosolia (Figs. 57, 60). 3 Painting of Good Shepherd in Arcosolium 7 (Fig. 293). 4 Cutting of Formae 1 and 8 (Fig. 299). Ottoman 5 Destruction of possible upper row of sarcophagi and building of Mudir’s house ca. 1900. Rowe’s Toms M. 16, N. 10; Cassets N. 13, N. 10 11.3.1 Historical Background

‘The terrain where Tombs N. 13 to N. 10 are situated, bordering the ancient road to Apollonia (Fig. 61), was probably covered in hillwash, leaving exposed the rocky outcrop with inscribed panel 658m to the east of N. 13, noticed in 1825 by Pacho (Fig. 261). Above Tomb N. 12 on the hillslope is the grave of epigraphist Herbert De Cou (II.2.1 Fig. 34), murdered on 11th March 1911 and buried across the top of an unused sarcophagus, demonstrating the depth of hillwash at this point.” The debris in Tomb N. 10 forecourt was still there in 1894 when Weld-Blundell photographed the adjoining tombs (1.2.3; Fig. 69). The tombs were initially cleared of architectural debris and hillwash c.1915 when the Italians built the military road (III.1.0). The forecourts of Tombs N. 12 and N. 13 were apparently already cleared as only superficial debris was removed by Rowe (Figs. 62-63). During survey work I found by accident on 26th September 1989 behind Tomb N. 12 a hitherto unknown chamber loculus tomb, undisturbed since robbing in antiquity, called here ‘Copland Tomb’ to differentiate it for subsequent observation and discussion (1.3.2; Figs. 223, 228). On the eastern side of the rocky outcrop are the shattered remains of Tomb N.

11, set back from the ancient road, and further on is Tomb N. 10, the space between occupied by a deep quarry. The chamber loculus Tomb N. 10 was first drawn in 1822 by Beechey as Tomb E. (12.1; Fig. 6), and later by Pacho as his Tomb C, recording the facade with its screen and entablature already fallen (1.2.2). The facade is pseudoisodomic work, described by Hamilton in 1852 as having ‘the smoothed rock. . scored with lines’, and the central loculus ‘fitted for the reception of urns. (Figs. 64, 261).” Rowe carried out the first survey since Pacho’s stylised plan in 1825.”

113.2 Archaeological Work

N. 13. The excavation entailed a slit trench being dug along the front of the facade and tomb entrance Loc. 1, revealing a dislodged isodomic block and an eastern cornice return block probably belonging to the screen (Figs. 62-63). The trench only reached the top of the step and not the forecourt floor, exposing the foot of the panelled doorslab which has a robber hole in an upper ® % ® » = ?

Rowe Arch. Ph. 16; Pacho (1827), 395 Pl. LXIL, 8; CIG 5175. Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ph. E. 728; Goodchild (1976), 290-295. Weld-Blundell (1896) Fig. 6. Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ph. E. 20; Ghislanzoni (1915), 106 PL. 53. Hamilton (1856), 65,67. Rowe Il, 7 Figs. VIII, IX.

106

comer (Fig. 64). Removal of the doorslab revealed an accumulation of hillwash inside, almost reaching the loculus ceiling. In clearing the loculus, only one separator slab was found in situ at the back, together with skeletal remains in the hillwash which Rowe thought: ‘had been dumped over the original debris’ From the lower debris came’ the fruit and ‘pieces of bronze wire’ from a funeral wreath M.157; ‘fragments of a Ptolemaic cinerary urn’, probably the ribbed hydria fragment M. 158; lamps (M. 164-165); ‘tear bottles’, probably glass; terracotta figurines M.166-167; ‘a Ptolemaic spindle vase M. 170, a small drinking cup with two handles M. 171, and a juglet M. 172, all more or less broken. Four lids from cinerary urns and a corroded bronze coin M. 162 were at the very bottom of the grave (Assem. XII Fig. 316 nos. 157-174).

Copland Tomb (Fig. 61) This provided an opportunity for a brief study of a tomb in its primary robbed state, recalling debris in tomb interiors recorded in 1861 by Porcher's watercolours. The following observations were noted and the tomb left untouched. Access was gained through the back of Tomb N. 12 chamber via a geological fault in the limestone; this opened into the end of Loc. 3 which was partly filled with a conglomerate of human bones and hillwash, and led to the rectangular chamber. In the western wall was the main entrance, through which a cone of hillwash had entered the tomb. The other three sides showed nine dwarf loculus entrances, their plain doorslabs lying face down on the chamber floor (Figs. 228, 292). Over and around them was a broken litter of human bones and burial artifacts, and concentrations of land snail shells. In the north-east corner were two human skulls facing each other. The loculi at their lowest level were filled with debris of human bones. Above this the sills in some cases still supported separator slabs for the upper level, their upper surface quite bare of skeletal remains or artifacts, but a thick precipitation of fine limestone crystals had formed on them (Fig. 298). Loc. 6 had been widened on the southern side by W. 1.70 m into a small square chamber H. 1.94 L. 2.20 W. 2.30 m with, in the south-eastern comer, a neatly stacked pile of human leg bones. Loc. 7 which led off this had similar dimensions to Loc. 6 (Fig. 223). Nothing is known of the architectural appearance of the buried rock-cut facade other than the possible extent of the forecourt, the access being by a stairway next to Tomb N. 13 leading from the ancient road (Figs. 57, 62-63). 11.3.3 Structural Description N. 13 Forecourt open and rectangular, with probably a step on three sides. There is no evidence of an entrance or boundary wall bordering the northern side at the edge of the ancient road as in adjoining Tomb N. 12, but the wall at the western side is cut from the natural rock slope, in which is a small barrel-vaulted recess for a grave; a stairway probably leads to the Copland Tomb behind (Figs. 61, 63). Fagade H. 2.50 L. 4.18 m plain except for two loculus entrances (Fig. 64). Only decorated on the eastern portion, containing Loc.1 entrance (VIL3.4; Fig. 298) bordered by two slender pilasters W. 0.20 and 1.32 m apart; over the entrance is a hoplite shield in low relief Dia. 1.04 m including a border of 0.06m, according to Cassels ‘a unique phenomenon’. Evidence for the entablature is indicated by a sill W. 0.45 m above the shield, with rebates immediately above each pilaster, and by pieces of the isodomic screen found by Rowe. In the western portion of the facade is the entrance to Loc. 2; the span between loculi is 1.98 m with no pseudoisodomic work on the facade. The original entrance to Loc. 2 was altered and recut as a loculus with a double vessel recess at the end (IL3.4). * Rowe (1952b), 10; RoweIl, 28 n3. 5 Rowe Arch. Phs. 304-306; Rowe I, 23 Fig. XI; I, 32 Addenda. ?' Rowe Arch. Phs. 17-21, 88-95; Cassels Arch. Ph. 191; Cassels (1955), 21 PI. VIII.

107 N. 12 Forecourt enclosed and rectangular L. 3.01 W. 2.67 m facing on to the ancient road,

with an entrance cut in the high boundary wall which is cut from the natural rock Th. 0.35 m, its return forming a common boundary with Tomb N. 13 on the western side (Figs. 61-63). Fagade has two entrances, each bordered by plain pilasters W. 0.15 m. The span between the entrances shows pseudo-orthostat and pseudoisodomic courses, with a sill above for a built entablature and screen, of which no fragments have survived (Fig. 66). Chamber H. 1.20 L. 3.04 W. 1.91 m apparently had a dividing wall Th. 0.14 m between the entrances, perhaps an alteration to enlarge the interior, evidence of which is buried at present by hillwash. Rocky outcrop H. 1.75 L. 10.80 m with vertical dressed face bordering the ancient road between Tombs N. 12 and N. 11 forecourts, the western section L. 7.20 m running at an obtuse

angle to the eastern section. A lightly-cut inscribed shallow panel recorded by Pacho is situated on the western section, 3.18 m from the edge of Tomb N. 12, with a smaller, uninscribed panel near-

by (Figs. 66, 261).” The outcrop above has been terraced, showing a semicircular construction

trench set back from the road, in which two ashlar blocks remain by Tomb N. 12. The interior

shows natural sloping rock, cut with two flat, rectangular, stepped surfaces bordering a large cir-

cular cremation receptacle Dia.0.52m overlooked by a Hellenistic rock-cut sarcophagus case (Figs. 61, 262).

N. 11 Forecourt open and rectangular L. 6.00 W. 2.00; 4.62 m with a step running around three sides and raised above the level of the ancient road to form a boundary (Fig. 61). Fagade of pseudoisodomic courses with central principal entrance, originally with a separate lintel, and plain pilasters in antis with a sill above for a built entablature and screen, its debris, together with the lintel, now missing (Fig. 66). Wide chamber shows the ruins of five loculi on the southern side with a later pair on the western side. Part of the roof has collapsed, due to the cutting of a rockcut grave in the defined area above the chamber. N. 10 Forecourt wedge-shaped L. 5.64; 5.37 W. 2.38; 2.88 m, with a surrounding step on

three sides level with the ancient road surface (Fig. 64). Fagade has a pseudo-orthostat course, badly weathered. Above this are six courses of pseudoisodomic work, smaller in the upper three courses H. 0.40; 038; L. 0.78 m. The central plain entrance with damaged cymatium above (Fig. 292) has a cluster of later niches over and beside it (Fig. 296). The span either side of the entrance is L. 1.73 m with two slender pilasters W. 0.30 m in antis, their bases standing on the step, which continue upwards to the sill for the now missing built Doric entablature and screen. The rock-cut return walls show different course sizes; the eastern flanking wall has pseudo-orthostat H. 0.91 above the step and three pseudoisodomic courses H. 0.60 L. 1.10 m up to the sill. The span L. 1.74 is confined by a pilaster W. 0.60 m as before. The corresponding western flanking wall has a badly weathered surface, obliterating any evidence of courses. In front are the remains of a plain entrance to an unfinished loculus, vertically truncated when the area became a quarry (Fig. 66).

Wide chamber H. 2.36 L. 6.18; 5.57 W. 2.56; 2.42 m step around three sides as before, with plain

walls and rock-cut ceiling showing on southern side an internal facade of five loculus entrances (Figs. 6, 292). At the rear of Loc. 3 is a pair of vessel niches (Figs. 261, 300), and in Locs. Roman cinerarium niches (Fig. 300).

? CIG 5175; Doc. Ant. 1-2 (1936),268 Cyrene 133 Tav. CXIV Fig. 109.

1-2 are

108 1.3.4 Observations

Tomb N. 13 may have been unfinished as Loc. 1 is complete, but the original entrance of Loc. 2 in a corresponding symmetrical position is only partly cut D. 0.80 m for insertion of a doorslab. It is possible that between these loculi a central one was intended, all with similar loculus modules (Figs. 66, 220). Loc. 1 is uncommon in that the separator slabs are above the level of the door threshold. Registered artifacts show no contamination of the assemblage as Rowe claimed, There is a lack of red figure or black-glazed artifacts, except for a fragment of large fluted hydria M. 158, and the assemblage lacks any trappings of military equipment to account for the shield above the entrance (Assem. XII; Fig. 316 nos. 157-174). The entrances of Tomb N. 12 resemble the loculus entrances of N. 13, implying that both tombs may have had originally the same loculi arrangement. The chamber width corresponds closely to the known length of Tomb N. 13 Loc. 1 and the dividing wall would seem to confirm this for the eastern part of the chamber. The western entrance leads into a small square chamber which could equally have been originally a loculus. Since the floor is uncleared, evidence for a lower level for these loculi is unknown. The dressed outcrop between Tombs N. 11 and N. 12 seems to be contemporary with the development of the ancient road, as tombs between Tombs N. 11 and N. 8 are all on the same alignment (Figs. 61, 67). The same may be true of the projection in front of Tombs N. 6 and N. 7, which

could be part of the same redevelopment (Figs. 77-78). The Pacho inscription on the rocky outcrop relates to traces of a built drum-shaped monument or exedra, partially terraced into the hillside (Figs, 66, 261). The precipitation of limestone dust in the Copland Tomb recalls George Dennis's 1867 description of a tomb interior (1.3.3). The different levels of the flanking walls of Tomb N. 10 indicate built isodomic work with an entablature above, on the eastern side resting on top of the epistyle sill of Tomb N. 9 facade (Figs. 79, 227). The interior arrangement of high single-level loculi is uncommon in Cyrene (Fig. 298), while the vessel niches lightly cut into the end of Loc.3 recall those in Tomb N. 13 Loc. 2 which are partly buried (Figs. 64, 300). A structural sequence of events has been isolated: Note: other phases (Figs. 77-80, 102-103) Phase Archaic-Classical 3 Ancient road surface (Fig. 77 Classical-Hellenistic 8 Cutting of Tomb N. 13, followed later by Tomb N. 12 (Figs. 66, 220)

10 Cutting of possibly three Doric Tombs N. 10-11 (Figs. 66, 79, 227) 14 Cutting of Copland Tomb and stairs to its forecourt; Maioletti’s ‘nonolitico’ (Figs. 61, 66, 258) 15 Building of circular tomb or exedra and cutting of inscription (CIG 5175; Figs. 61, 66, 261) 19 Cutting of cinerarium niches in Tomb N. 10 (Figs. 64, 227, 300)

Rows’s Toms N. 9-2, CasseLs N. 9-2

11.4.1 Historical Background This range of archaic tombs on the western slope of Wadi Haleg Shaloof is terraced into the hillside beside the ancient road to Apollonia (Fig. 67). Above them the ground continues to rise as a slope, flattening out to an area occupied by the Antiquities Department's buildings, then continues sharply upwards to the top of the escarpment. The area of these buildings is deeply covered in hillwash which has spread down the hill and on to the ancient road. Some of the archaic tomb

109

epistyles show the ends of cut gullies for surface water (114.3). In 1811-12 Cervelli inaccurately recorded an entrance resembling that of Tomb N. 8 and a facade which must be that of N. 5 (Fig. 290). Pacho in 1825 recorded this range of tombs with an elevation and plan but omitted the Tomb N. 7 forma, at that time probably buried in hillwash (1.2.2) δὶ In 1852 Hamilton realised that these tombs were of “120 epochs’, the earliest being ‘monolithic and in one the Doric columns are of abnormal proportion’, the latter probably being Tomb N. 5 (Fig, 75); he does not describe Acolic Tombs N. 2-4, but mentions Ionic Tomb N. 8 as having ‘graceful decorations (Fig. 74).2 The first general photographic view of these tombs was produced by Smith and Porcher in 1861, showing Tombs N. 9-7 with hillwash and debris in front of them (Fig. 68).° Weld-Blundell recorded them in 1894 from the opposite side facing Tomb N. 7 (Figs. 69, 79). A panorama of Tombs N. 2-10 shows no disturbance of the deep hillwash, but resting on the epistyle of N. 2 were large stone blocks, not present today.“ In 1904 Hogarth recorded Tombs N. 4 and N. 8-9 which at this time were still uncleared (I1.2.1).” Norton photographed the Mudir in the portico of N. 4, per

haps indicating clearance by his 1911 expedition (1.4.1); almost contemporary views were pub-

lished of the columns of Tombs N. 7-8.” The construction of the military road must have entailed final clearance of hillwash and debris (1.1.1; Fig. 70), probably causing the loss of the small block sarcophagus case over N. 9 shown by Pacho and in early photographs (Figs. 68-69, 79). Maioletti in ca. 1925 partly recorded on Tombs N. 7-8 various architectural elements.” In 1957 Alan Rowe surveyed and published the whole range of tombs in a series of simplified plans and elevations.” These were replanned by Stucchi in 1975, who additionally plotted for the first time the tombs described by Cassels on both slopes of Wadi Haleg Shaloof, and also what has since been reali as the site of Norton’s excavations, overlooked by the archaic tombs (Figs. 34-35). 11.4.2 Archaeological Work Some of these Tombs N. 9-2 may have been cleared by Norton, based on published photographic evidence of the Mudir in the portico of Tomb N. 4 and the damp level visible on the central pillar beside him, but no published reference exists to any burial artifacts being found (1.4.1).

11.4.3 Structural Description

These archaic tombs are described individually in reverse numerical order as Tomb N. 9 is the nearest to the city, whereas N. 2 is the furthest away (Figs. 74-76). N. 9 Facade tristyle in antis H. 3. 45 L. 4. 32m, the Doric columns unfluted and capitals un-

© Cervelli (1825), 27 PL IL8.9. © Pacho (1827), 374 Pls. XXXVILXXXVIII. © Hamilton (1856), 65. © Brit. Mus. G.R. Dept. Album II Ph. 23,3. ^ Brit. Mus. G.R. Dept. Rep. Weld-Blundell Ph. 10; Weld-Blundell (1896), 132 Figs. 5.6. © Hogarth (1905) Pls. opp. 98, 104, 100. © Norton (1911), 147 PL LIV. © Mathuisieubx H.-M. (1912) Pl. 30;Horn (1943), 197-198 Abb.27. © Pacho (1827) Pl. XXXVII; Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ph. E. 20; Ghislanzoni (1915), 106 Figs. 52.53. © Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ph. 26; E. 16; Maioletti (1930), 575; (1931a), 716 Fig. ™ Buttle Arch. Phs. 9/25-35, 17/-, Thesis Ph. 14; Fairman Arch. Rowe Phs. 72, 73, 77, 76, 75, 80; Rowe II, 6-7 Figs VIILIX Pls.162-¢,1 72+ ® Stucchi (1975) Tav. VI.

110

finished (Figs. 74, 287). High plain entablature, above which at the eastern end, set back on the natural hillslope, was a block-cut chest sarcophagus, now absent (IL4.1; Figs. 68-70). At the westem end the entablature shows a cut sill in the natural surface required for Tomb N. 10 built isodomic work and entablature (Figs. 74, 79). Portico H. 1. 67 from step, L. 3. 98 W. 2. 07m, ceiling with uneven surface and rudimentary cutting on the backs of the capitals. Plain entrance with raised threshold 0. 20m above the chamber floor, flanked by two Roman rectangular niches (Fig. 296). Chamber rectangular H. 1. 85 L. 3. 14 W. 2. 67m; the well-dressed interior has two formae, one unfinished (VIL12.9).

N. 8 Facade distyle in antis H. 3. 02 L. 4. 15m. Slender Ionic fluted columns with voluted capitals, showing an unusual double-level echinus (Figs. 68-70, 74, 288).” The antae decoration continues down the rounded inner corner with a wavy pattern. The entablature shows an architrave without frieze, having a pediment with a decorative raking cornice, central acroterion palmette and side acroteria volutes (VIL2.3), with a shallow centrally-cut niche for a bust in the tympanum (Fig. 296). Portico H. 1. 95+ L. 3. 40 W. 2. 14m regularly cut with a step round three sides. There is a decorated cymatium above the entrance which has dowel holes on its surround and is flanked by two symmetrically-placed round-headed Roman funeral bust niches (Figs. 290, 296). Chamber rectangular H. 2. 10 L. 5. 24 W. 3. 46m, much altered from its original arrangement, showing two pairs of formae at the sides. At the rear is a later pair of square-headed arcosolium recesses cut with a mason’s pin (VIL12.8; Figs. 74, 79). N. 7 The projection continues in front of Tomb N. 6 and is an integral part of it, L. 7. 35

W. 1.60m. At the north-western end are two quarryman’s channelling trenches W. 0. 08m set apart by 1.15m, indicating that blocks of stone of this size had been removed, forming the present alignment of the ancient road which bordered it (Figs. 67-71, 75).” Facade tristyle H. 2. 20 L. 4. 20m, well-formed Doric fluted columns supporting a plain dressed epistyle with natural sill (Fig. 287). Portico H. 1. 93 L. 3. 25 W. 1. 92m has a step around three sides, the eastern return continuing across the floor by N. 6 forma. Plain entrance with a square central niche above (VIL3.15 Fig. 296).

Chamber trapezoidal H. 1. 68 L. 2. 95 W.

2. 98, 2. 24m with a forma on the western

side (VIL12.5). N. 6 The projection is an integral part of this tomb’s frontage and that of adjoining Tomb N. 7. Facade tristyle with Doric fluted columns (Fig. 287) and overhanging, unfinished episiyle which gives the limits of the facade H. 2. 11 L. 3. 72m from the rebate (Figs. 69-71, 75, 77). The capitals are set back from the epistyle by 0. 20-0. 45m, on the same parallel alignment as Tomb N. 7 Portico H. 2. 05 L. 3. 25 W. 4. 38m has an uneven floor with a forma (VII.12.9); an open drain

runs from the door and across the portico, perhaps indicating Ottoman occupation. Plain entrance with a threshold 0. 15m above the chamber floor and a central niche over the door (Figs. 290, 296). Chamber rhomboidal H. 1. 85 L. 3. 35 W. 3. 32m, with no burial features inside. An uneven floor slopes down towards the entrance and is 0. 30m aboveN. 7 floor level. The ceiling is deeply undulating, a feature also noticed in the portico. N. 5 Facade tristyle in antis H. 2. 70 L. 4. 80m. The projection in front of Tombs N. 7-6 once extended across N. 5, but was removed to give the facade a Roman stylobate, which continued into the portico (Figs. 71, 75, 77-78, 80).” A row of rectangular blocks was later inserted between ® Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 77; Rowe II Pl. 16c; Bacchielli (19943), 102. ? Goodchild (1971), 168 Abb. 131. γε Goodchild (1971), 168 Abb. 132.

un

and behind the columns, blocking off the portico steps.” Rudimentary unfluted Doric columns

support a dressed epistyle with a small later cut niche and natural sill above (Figs. 287, 296). Portico H. 1. 95 L. 6. 25 W. 2. 78m, with undulating floor and remnants of a step around the walls with small Forma 6, above which is an ossuary niche; the badly undulating ceiling is practically

barrel-vaulted (VIL12.9; VIL12.11). The entrance was much altered and recut, probably with a rudimentary cymatium, and mutilated by later Roman niches (Figs. 290, 296). Cut into the portico

floor are four holes, one pair on either side of the entrance. Raised above the portico floor is a theke with a square entrance (Figs. 290, 298). Close to the niche beside this theke is a small sur-

viving area of painted mural, showing in red ochre an outstretched left arm holding a garland which crosses the figure. The remainder of the figure is presently obliterated by the limewash

which has preserved it (VII.4.0). Chamber square H. 1. 96 L. 3. 70 W. 3. 75m with uneven floor

stepped down by 0. 10m from the level of the threshold, much altered by the cutting of Formae

3-5 (Figs. 237, 299) and subsequently converted to serve as a cubiculum with Arcosolia 1-2 (VILI2.8). Superficial damage was caused above Forma 5 by cutting a round-headed slit window with embrasure, which clips the corner of a rectangular portico niche (Fig. 296)

N. 4 Facade tristyle in antis set back by 0. 72m from N. 5 (Figs. 72, 75-76), also includes the facade of Tomb N. 3 which is part of the same quarrying, H. 3. 00 and combined L. 13. 25m including a natural dividing anta between H. 2. 03 W. 0. 64m, representing the same proportions as the symmetrically-placed Aeolic pillars which show lightly-cut decoration (Fig, 288). The epistyle is uniform in height in comparison with that of Tomb N. 3 (Fig. 78). Portico H. 2. 35 L. 5. 80 W. 3. 75m dressed with a mason’s pin; a step around three sides is confined behind the pillars. The plain raised rectangular entrance has five square niches above (VIL3.2; Fig. 296). Chamber rectangularH. 1. 72 1.3.55 W. 3. 08m, the square central part lowered by 0. 38m to form rudimentary klinai around the chamber, which has an undulating floor (VIL5.1). In the south and west walls above the klinai are two ossuary niches (VILI2.11), with an inscription in the south-east corner (VIL8.2) N. 3 Facade tristyle in antis H. 2. 48 with plain Aeolic pillars, includes the fagade of Tomb N. 4 (Figs. 72, 76, 288). The eastern bay was later altered to form a rectangular opening by chopping back the side of the pillar and capital, the base of which is unfinished at the rear. The epistyle sill shows the natural contour of the rock surface which continues into Tomb N. 4 facade. Portico H. 2. 30 L. 5. 78 W. 2. 35m dressed with a mason's pin, with a step running round three sides as Tomb N. 4. ‘Child's grave (not shown on plan) on left side of porch? is not visible today.” The plain raised rectangular entrance has five round-headed niches above (Figs. 290, 296). Chamber rectangular H. 2. 21 L. 4. 11 W. 3. 42m, with an undulating floor; three low klinai around the walls, the eastern one decorated with a dwarf Acolic pillar similar to that on Tomb N. 4 facade. (Figs. 288, 295); an ossuary ‘niche in one wall. Traces of painted frescoes’, but these are untraced.”” N. 2 Facade tristyle in antis H. 2. 60, 2. 90 L. 5. 40m, plain Aeolic pillars, their intercolumniation irregular at the eastern end with an anta showing three later cut niches (Figs. 73, 76, 288, 296). The epistyle shows the natural contour of the rock surface following the line of the hillside, with along it a regular row of quarryman’s wedge-slots (Figs. 78, 289). Portico H. 2. 05 L. 5. 32 W. 1. 50, 1. 83m dressed with a mason's pin, a technique noticed throughout the tomb. A step around three sides projects in front of the facade on the western side. Above the step at either end is an ossuary niche; between is a plain raised entrance with three later niches above (Figs. 262, ® Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 73; Rowe II Pl. 16b. ® Rowe Il, 6. ” Rowe II, 6: This may be based on Smith and Porcher (1864) Pl, 21 where similar niches exist with mural decoration.

112

290, 296, 300). Chamber rectangular H. 1. 83 L. 4. 17 W. 3. 85m, completely plain with a primary

unaltered, undulating floor. 114.4 Observations

The alignment of the ancient road overlooked by these tombs terraced into the hillside may indicate the sequence of its development and the tombs’phases. This is based on running a line from the rocky outcrop to Tomb N. 2, with the following results (Figs. 61, 67). The remains of this rocky outcrop form a projection in front of Tombs N. 5-7, over which ran the archaic road surface, following the hillside’s natural contours. This was later levelled and the projection cut away to its present shape, leaving a deliberate boundary between tombs and road (Fig. 70). The abrupt ending of the projection on the western side by Tombs N. 8-9 suggests that originally it continued westwards before these tombs were cut (Figs. 77, 79). In the opposite direction, Aeolic ‘Tombs N. 2-4 were cut level with the later road surface, indicating that the tail of the projection was removed at this time, when the road was re-aligned (Figs. 67, 78). The later stylobate in front of Tomb N. 5 represents the last phase of this projection’s alteration (Fig. 80). A development of the road is represented by the dressed face of the outcrop by Tomb N. 12, which changes direction by Tomb N. 11 forecourt (Figs. 61, 66); its alignment continues to Tomb N. 8 facade (Fig. 79) and is parallel to the projection alignment in front of Tombs N. 6-7 (Fig. 80). If the latter alignment were extended, it would continue to the anta between Tombs N. 3-4 (Fig. 78). The later stylobate alignment of Tomb N. 5 if also projected would continue across the facade of Tomb N. 3 to the eastern anta (Figs. 67, 80).

The facade of Tomb N. 9 has unfinished capitals, with the dressed surface of the entablature above perhaps intended for a cut pediment, although no scribe lines for its outline can be discerned, suggesting alternatively an attic, as the sill above shows no dressed surface for a built superstructure other than the later Tomb N. 10 isodomic-built forecourt wall (Figs. 74, 77, 79). Archaic Ionic Tomb N. 8 is the only distyle example, the others which are earlier being tristyle (Figs. 74, 77-78). The chambers in Tombs N. 6-7 are thomboidal, as if an earlier boundary predated Tomb N. 8 (Figs. 77, 79). Tomb N. 7 predates N. 6, indicated by the remains of the original portico step in the south-cast corner, representing the alignment for the eastern anta (Fig. 77), and the epistyle is set back by a rebate from that of Tomb N. 6 and also from the entablature of Tomb N. 8 (Figs. 77, 79). The portico of Tomb N. 6 is cut at the same angle as that of N. 7, as if inserted The antae in Tombs N. 5 and N. 7 were removed, and this would account for the unfinished epistyle of N. 6 (Fig. 77). Tomb N. 5 entrance and chamber show extensive Roman alterations, the latter converted to a cubiculum with arcosolia similar in arrangement to Tomb N. 82 (Figs. 80, 191, 237). Tombs N. 4-2 seem to be contemporary, having pillars with the same proportions, although those of N. 4 differ by being slightly longer and decorated (Fig. 288). The quarryman's wedge-slots on the epistyle of Tomb N. 2 could represent preparation for a sill for an intended built pediment (Figs. 78, 208), The architectural styles shown on these tombs cannot be compared with other examples, except for those cut in the Western Necropolis (Figs. 208, 212). A structural sequence of events has been isolated: Note: other phases (Figs. 66, 102-103) Phase:

Archaic-Classical 1 Archaic Doric Tomb N. 5 cut beside undulating ancient track; later insertion of theke (Figs. 75, 77). 2 Cutting of Tomb N. 7 and later N. 6, the latter's unfinished epistyle leaving rebate (Figs. 77)

113

3 Ancient road lowered to present level, leaving projection in front of tombs (Fig. 77). 4 Removal of western end of projection and cutting of Early Doric Tomb N. 9 (Fig. 77). 5. Removal of eastern end of projection and cutting of Acolic Tombs N. 2-4 (Figs. 78, 103). 6 Part of projection removed and Early Ionic Tomb N. 8 cut (Fig. 79). Classical-Hellenistic 10 Cutting of possibly three adjoining Doric Tombs N. 10-11 (Figs. 66, 79) 11 Destruction of earlier Aeolic tomb, cutting and building of later Doric Tomb N. 401 (Figs. 79, 103) 16 Cutting of quarry between earlier Doric Tombs N. 10-11 (Figs. 61, 66) 17 Tomb N. 5 stylobate cut; burial chambers of Tombs N. 5 and N. 8 recut with formae (Figs. 79, 80). 18 Cutting of arcosolia and a window in Tomb N. 5 and arcosolium zecesses in Tomb N. 8 (Figs. 79, 80) Ottoman 20 Cutting of recent gully for Bedouin occupation in Tomb N. 6 (Fig. 75). Rowe’s Tomas M. 15, N. 401, N. 34; Cassets N. 1, N. 401, N. 34 115.1 Historical Background

The slope at the head of Wadi Haleg Shaloof provides a dramatic setting where the ancient road from Apollonia to Cyrene turns sharply to run in front of the archaic rock-cut tombs (Figs. 67, 81). Hillwash obscured some of the tombs in this area, which after 1925 were being cleared (Figs. 82-91). Carved on the rockface east of Tomb N. 34 is ‘V. 1897’, also found on a stele base between Tomb N. 14 and Maioletti’s sarcophagus, but its significance is unclear (Figs. 243, 258). The first reference in 1911 to the existence of a ‘fine circular tomb’ was given by Norton in his campaign of excavations (Fig. 34).” At that time Tomb N. 1 was covered by an overburden of hillwash, and when this was cleared away, the roof was revealed virtually intact. Norton exposed completely the whole of the side facing the ancient road showing the drum sitting on a stepped crepidoma. By 1915 it was known as the ‘Tomba dei coníug?, and in the vicinity an incomplete inscription was found, a reworking of which Professor Anthony Birley reads:

Pomplont avavaı cols des(ignato) patrono] Per... MAMPINIANVM PROCIos The tomb interior was eventually excavated in 1925-26, in the process removing the roof (Figs. 83, 87), and subsequently consolidated by 1938 into its present appearance (Fig, 96).® The adjacent Tombs N. 34 and N. 401 immediately below were partially cleared and at the same time the fallen facade to the latter was reinstated (Fig. 101); although by 1949 this facade had disappeared," Rowe was able to detect that it had been ‘once faced with masonry’ (Figs. 91-92).* In his 1952 campaign he produced a simplified diagrammatic plan of Tomb N. 1, but was unable to re” Jaimee Uhlenbrock’s information from the Norton archive shows three close views of Tomb N. 1; Norton (1911), 160. ” The full extent of Norton's clearance is shown in Ghislanzoni (1915), 106, 112, 115, 176-179 Fig. 52; Rowe I, 10 and nl © Rowe Arch. Phs. 140, 241-242; Buttle Arch. Phs. 3/33, Thesis Ph. 94; Rowe (1948) Pl. X, 1; RoweI PI. 6d; Cassels (1955), 11 Pl, IVb; Goodchild (1971), 168 Abb.134; Santucci (2003), 183-204 Figs. 1-23). ® Jowett Arch. Notebook fol. 19 Ph. Album 444 dated 29.9.49, = Rowe Il, 6 Figs. VIILIX.

114

l drawcord the subterranean chamber because “there were live bombs in the shafr' 9 Architecturacopied by were roof the of tracings which of 1925 in ings of the tomb were done by the Italians 1 N. Tomb of section unfinished Ward Perkins'architects in ca. 1955, including an elevation and showing the dismantled temple Tomb N. 1 bis. 1 inside (Figs. 95, 97). 11.5.2 Archaeological Work

N. 1 In the spring of 1924 the enclosure was cleared and its collapsed walls re-erected and consolidated, excavation of the main tomb taking place in 1925-26 (Figs. 82-84, 96). The results are given in a brief anonymous report entitled "Attività Archeologica in Cirenaica’.® The following extracts mention that on 2nd November 1925, during clearance of the shaft leading to the subterranean chamber, objects were found, ‘un intaglio quadrangolare di m. 2,20 per 0,84 and ‘a m. 1,50 di profondità una basetta in marmo con il nome e il patronimico greco del ricco proprietario della tomba’, which Oliverio gives as: oPAxaN TIAPMENIONOE (Fig. 256)" It then states ‘Si trattava in realtà di una specie di vestibolo che dava accesso alla cella funeraria quadrangolare e priva di qualsiasi ornamento’ for a description of the subterranean chamber. On 17th January 1926 were found in the chamber ‘rovesciata una grandissima anfora panciuta, a vernice nera, a sottili costolature, contemente le ossa combuste del morto: tutl'intorno, in disordine, molti altri vasi di varia forma e stile, e cinque oggetti di alabastro, molto belli, fra i quali un portaprofumi di forma elegantissima’. The burial artifacts, now untraced, survive only as two contemporary glass negatives (Figs. 85-86) whose sleeves locate them to the subterranean chamber, the ‘Joculo a sud della Tomba Circulare CATALOGUE OF ARTIFACTS Calcite vessels (Fig. 85) Back Row

1 2 3

Small bowl, curved profile meeting a footring, large fragment broken off one side. A smaller example found in Apollonia Museum Necropolis Tomb e, (Goodchild (1977) 122, Tav. XXI. d Inv. 66-445). Unguentarium, flared neck and semi-globular body. The form comparable with ceramic example from Cyrene (Fig. 395 no. 1077). Small bow, identical to 1, but complete. Front Row

4 Olpe, disk-rim, flared neck with rod handle, slender pyriform body with splayed ringfoot. Example in the Dennis Collection shows a base plug manufactured separately from the body. H. 0. 305 Dia: Rim 0. 06 Girth 0. 125m (Brit. Mus. G. R. Inv. 1868, 7-5, 157). 5 Basin, rounded flanged rim partly broken, the inner edge slanting inwards to a flat base. A fragment probably of the same profile found in the Demeter Sanctuary at Cyrene (White (1990), 58 no. 436 Pl 43). Two smaller examples occur in the Necropolis at Sciatbi in Alexandria (Brecchia (1912), 98 nos. 307, 309 Figs. 60,62). Dia. 0. 185m. 6 Small flask, pyriform body with raised band at base of high cylindrical neck, on which are a pair of © ® © = ©

Rowel, 10 Fig. L Cassels Arch. Misc; Stucchi (1975), 79 Figs. 73-74; (1988), 316-317 Figs. 117-118. Ant. Dept. Cyr. Lett.Book fol. 17; Santucci (2003), 183-204 Figs. 1-23) Cassels (1955), 11; SE. Cir (1963), 268 Fig. 73 no. 9. Ant, Dept. Cyr. Pls. 1603, F.7 7; 1602, E. 652.

15

7 8 9. 10 11 12

bands just below a protruding flanged ring near the flat rim. The form of this vessel seems to imitate an example blown in glass. There is a slightly larger example in the Dennis Collection, where it can be observed that the vessel has been manufactured in three parts, the neck, the body and the base plug. H. 0. 165 Dia: Rim 0. 02 Girth 0. 095m (Brit. Mus. G. R. Inv. 1868, 7-5, 161). Black-glazed Wares (Fig. 86) Lid belonging to a ribbed amphora described below (10). Knob on the obverse most probably broken off at its base. On the reverse impressions of five radiating palmette stamps are shown in the centre. Askos, red figure decoration inferred by glaze running over convex top through arched handle opening. Small lamp, Broneer Type VIII. Inward-sloping rim, small filling hole. Long flat-topped nozzle with rounded end. Double convex body, spur on shoulder. Raised footring. Large ribbed amphora (Attic Type IId). Flared lip shows small drilled hole just below rim probably for an ancient repair by lead rivet. Similar examples found at Benghazi H. 0. 674 and at MessaH. 0. 468m give an indication of its probable size. An identical rim fragment found at Cyrene by Rowein his Northern Necropolis excavations (Fig. 403 no. 1135) One-handled bowl, collared rim, horizontal handle, similar to one found by Rowe (Fig. 320 no. 200a). Small ribbed pelike, covered by lime concretion, heavy grooved rim, ribbed body and double-grooved ringfoot. A similar example found in a tomb at Apollonia (Ghislanzoni (1915), 101 Fig. 49 bis).

N. 1 bis. 1 By 18th October 1926 the dismantled built temple tomb within the drum had been excavated (Fig. 87)" and a robber hole noticed in the central wall by the principal entrances and recorded on the roof plan (Fig. 95). The burial artifacts, now untraced, consisted of a ring, coin and collection of vessels (Figs. 89-90). Their location is given on two negative sleeves as ‘proten delle reavo interno della Tomba Circ.’ which is the only indication that these artifacts were found.” At the western end of the southern compartment was a small rock-cut grave in the floor, which contained human bones.” CATALOGUE OF ARTIFACTS

‘Small Finds (Fig. 89)

13 Coin, bronze, 14mm dia. Obv. Silphium plant Type ΠῚς obliterated by corrosion products (B. M. Cyr. 69, PL. XVI. 6c). Identification from glass negative inconclusive. Rev. Unknown. 14 Signet ring, bi-metallic, cylindrical loop, mounted oval intaglio 23mm long, engraved young female portrait looking left. The head is unveiled, showing the hair gathered into a flat plaited coil at the back, but obliterated by corrosion products. A simple necklace can be seen, but ear pendants are uncertain, and as a seal impression the head would look right. The hairstyle is similar to that depicted on female heads of Ptolemaic rulers. Berenike II, daughter of King Magas of Cyrene, c. 273-221 B. C. shows a similar hairstyle in portraits on issued coins, with the head looking to the right (BMC Cyr. 75-76 nos. 9-10 PI ΧΧΙΧ. 13,14). The Mottola gold ring found in a tomb with necklaces and bracelets shows a similar head but of an older woman looking right (Boardman (1970), 371 Pl. 1008). The Ashmolean Museum example shows a similar portrait on a bi-metallic ring of iron with a gold intaglio, which may be the materials used for the Cyrene example (Richter (1968), 159,161 nos. 627, 643).

© Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ph. 1687, E. 638. ® Ant. Dept. Cyr. Phs.1691,F. 815; 1635,F. 809. ? Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ph. F. 803.

116 ‘Ceramics (Fig. 90)

15 Lekanis, black-glazed ware, pink fabric, high swung handles, rim inclined inwards to receive lid. Flared footring. An identical example complete with lid found in Museum Necropolis Tomb 8, Apollonia as signed date of 375-350 B. C. (Goodchild (1977), 124, Tav. XXIV. d). 16 Balsamarium, glass, identical to one found by Rowe (Fig. 328 no. H. IIL5. vii) 17 Amphoriskos, pale buff fabric, painted horizontal red bands, probably a miniature of a local amphora type such as that from Museum Necropolis Tomb e, Apollonia (Goodchild (1977), 123 Tav. XXIIL b). 18 Lamp, black-glazed ware, pink fabric, identical to one found by Rowe (Fig. 358 no. 698), assigned dating 475-375 B. C.

N. 1 bis. 2 In 1926, during digging of a wide trench for restoration of the western temenos this was found a tumbled marble aniconic half-figure. In January 2000 robbing revealed a cremation burial, and in the following rescue excavation by the Antiquities Department a cluster of undisturbed artifacts was found in situ, including silver bracelets which were claimed to have been

wall of Tomb N. 1, a series of panelled orthostats was uncovered abutting its exterior, and behind

found in front of this assemblage. However, inside the lid of a lekanis was noticed a shadow of

corrosion products, as if a silver bracelet had rested inside the lid of the upturned vessel, and this would account for the good preservation of this jewellery, which seems to have been protected (Figs. 81, 88, 95, 100).

N. 401 was partially cleared by 1924, exposing the forecourt filled with debris from the fallen free-standing built facade, and the small burial chamber behind was probably cleared of hillwash, although any archaeological material from it is unknown (Figs. 91, 101) N. 34 forecourt was partially cleared of debris and hillwash; above and behind the panelled orthostat-built wall is a defined arca, still partly buried. This had been revealed by 1938, but the tomb loculus is still uncleared (Figs. 92, 101).” 11.5.3 Structural Description

The components of circular Tomb N. 1 (Figs. 96-98) with its unique composite interior construction, containing temple Tomb N. 1 bis. 1 (Figs. 97, 99), and the subsequent adjoining shrine Tomb N. 1 bis, 2 have been described separately, as have the associated Tombs N. 401 and N. 34 (Figs. 100-101). # Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ph. 882, F. 453; Cassels Arch. Ph. 47; Deutsches Archäologisches Institut (Rome) Photographic Library neg. no. 58.2143; Goodchild (1971), 166-167 Abb. 127; Beschi (1972), 148-149 Fig. 9. ‘The destructive nature of the robbers had dislodged four large isodomic blocks from the temenos wall of Tomb N. 1 to gain access into the interior ofthis tomb, in the process destroying the orthostat panel first seen in 1926 (PI. 41) but revvealing the side panel of a naiskos still in situ on the roof plinth. The rescue excavation by the Antiquities Department ‘was done under adverse conditions of wind and rain, and discovered remains of the cremation and apparently a cluster of burial artifacts in the far corner, some of which were complete. Comparison can be made with Rowe's cremation group from N. 81-AC, where artifacts similar in their range and date were found, again associated with silver jewellery (Figs. 412-418, 203 nos. 1189-1254). The artifacts recovered by the Department consist of: two small silver bracelets; one bronze disk mirror like M. 320; red figure: three kalpides similar to M. 1244; black glazed wares: bolsal like M. 753; lekanis similar to M. 1252; lekanis similar to M. 1254 with one handle; lamp like M. 1316; local unglazed wares: small water amphora like M. 1257; olpe (pyriform) like M. 789. The naiskos panel revealed by the robbers recalls the larger. example found in Beschi's Tomb S. 80 bis which has a pediment above (Fig. 99). Thanks are due to Said Faraj and Abdul Rheem Saleh for the above information and for allowing me to study the artifacts ® Uncini (1985),93 PL 7. III,1.

ur

N. 1 is a composite, incorporating in its structure the earlier temple Tomb N. 1 bis. 1 and its northern temenos wall, and subsequently a shaft to a subterranean chamber (Figs. 83-84, 87). Crepidoma, upper step south L. 8. 17, east L. 8. 12m, Offsets to the triple steps are 0. 14m in each case, H. 0. 27m. Blocks H. 0. 28 L. 1. 50 W.

0. 70m show recessive moulding (Fig. 82). The lower

step and foundation course are terraced into the natural rock surface of the northern half of the enclosure, resulting in the courses not continuing through. The south-west corner shows a lifting boss on the second step. The crepidoma does not extend inside the drum wall, leaving spaces on the north and south sides of the rectangular temple tomb, incorporating the east and west steps in its base (Figs. 96-97). Around the inside face of the drum at foundation level are what appear to be four equidistant marker blocks to set out the drum wall. Drum H. 1. 57 Dia. 8. 12m. The base consists of two courses, each H. 0. 27m, the lower one showing an apophyge, the upper an inverted cyma reversa of lesbian kymation with an astragal of bead and reel (Figs. 82, 96). Above these are three courses of isodomic masonry each of sixteen blocks, forming a circumference of 24. 14m. H. 0. 25, 0. 24 L. 1. 21 W. 0.55, 0. 72m. Surmounting this, the entablature H. 0. 29m has

a projecting architrave showing taenia, regulae and six guttae, above which is an astragal of bead and reel, cyma reversa of lesbian kymation and ovolo of egg and dart. The final course is a cyma recta showing fluted tongues forming the cymatium.” Roof consisted originally of forty tile segments in two concentric courses (Figs. 83-84, 87, 96) overlapping by an 0. 08m rebate, the slabs L. 1.70 W.

1. 12 taper to 0. 60 Th. 0. 27m with radial chamfered flanges H. and W. 0. 04m.

The

tiles show a fall of 0. 13m to the cymatium. The structure rests on roof paving of irregular-shaped slabs Th. 0. 28m rising gently in the middle to the apex, supported by the truncated northern enclosure wall and by the rectangular tomb, both contained within the circular drum. Shaft shows a

dressed rim, L. 2. 20 W. 0. 84 D. over 2. 40m in a central position 0. 14m from the crepidoma (Figs.

84, 96-97). At the western corners of the south and north sides are vertical rows of footholds, and on its northern side the shaft D. 1. 40m opens into a chamber H. over 1. 00 L. 2. 20 W.

1. 20m.

N. 1 bis. 1 built rectangular tomb with a triple-stepped base, the courses reducing in height including offsets towards the top, H. 1. 92 L. 6. 53 W. 3. 57m. The moulded base course shows a

cyma reversa with astragal above, which is a simple chamfer on the southern side (Fig. 97).* This course continues through the wall thickness, projecting into the compartments by 0. 11m as a chamfered sill to support separator slabs. Above the stepped base are three surviving isodomic courses of irregular blocks H. 0. 32 L. 1. 55-1. 71 Th. 0. 42m, the lowest showing a recessive moulding. The principal entrances, cut through the stepped base, still retain their doorslabs in situ (Figs. 198, 292). The tomb interior consists of two compartments L. 5. 33 W. 0. 86m separat-

ed by a central pseudoisodomic wall Th. 0. 32m. The compartments are at two levels, the lower one H. 1. 20, the upper level surviving to H. 1. 06 with a separator slab Th. 0. 12m. In compari-

son, the top of the crepidoma is level with the top of the second step on the rectangular tomb, and the top of the moulded base is level with the second course on the northern temenos wall (Fig. 97).” Enclosure interior has a weathered natural rock surface area L. 11. 20 W. 8. 10m, which on

the southern part was stripped off and dressed to form a floor between the temenos wall and the Tomb N. 1 crepidoma (Figs. 83-84, 96, 99). In the eastern half of this area are five repositioned

klinai against the walls, with one jutting out in the centre to meet the lip of the shaft (Fig. 295). The western half shows a construction trench against the walls, inside which a course of ashlar forms a continuous step. The enclosure walls consist of eight isodomic courses of uniform-sized

® Buttle Arch. Phs. 17/15, Thesis Pls, 36-37; Cassels Arch. Phs. 50, 164, 204, 235; Cassels (1955), 11 PI. VIIIb-c. % Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ph. 1630-804; Cassels Arch. Ph. 234; (1955), 11. Cassels Arch. Phs. 49, 52; Goodchild (1971), 168 Abb. 133-134.

118

ashlar H. 0. 45 L. 1. 10 Th. 0. 72m, capped by ridged coping H. 3. 63m, with epigraphy surviving in the south-east comer (VIL.8.2). The original north wall exists as four courses H. 1. 80 L. 5. 40m, truncated and confined within the drum of the later ‘Tomb N. 1 (Fig. 97). These walls were extensively restored soon after 1925, with the south wall being shored up; the eastern wall had collapsed on Tomb N. 1 (IL5.2).* N. 1 bis. 2 panelled orthostat-built temenos wall (Figs. 88, 100) probably with triple-stepped base H. 1.93m. An exposed orthostat shows broad recessed panels H. 0.85 L. 0.65 Th. 0.23m; recent tomb robbing revealed the existence of the roof, with a side panel with its Doric fluted pilaster belonging to a naiskos, which is unique by being in situ (Figs. 95, 243-244, 254). N. 401 Forecourt L. 7.63 W. 6.70 m set back from the ancient road, terraced into the hillside

(Figs. 81, 91). Facade originally built free-standing, consisting of a course of orthostats with seven isodomic courses above. Fragments of the entablature show the architrave with regulae and guttae at close intervals. The door was a chambranle with consoles which support the missing cymatium, with a false doorslab in two parts, the upper half panelled. A lower panelled slab, now missing, originally concealed the present entrance. This whole facade has since disappeared, now showing a simple cut entrance in the plain rockface (Figs. 92, 101). Chamber H. 1.70 L. 2.63 W. 2.48 m contains a Roman forma in the floor (VIL.12.9) and in the southern wall a Roman ossuary recess; to the west is an unfinished loculus cut with a mason's pin (VII.12.5; Fig. 300). N. 34 Forecourt L. 9.81 W. 2.00 m set back a little from the ancient road and terraced into

the hillside, but at present any other structural features remain buried (Figs. 81, 93, 101). Facade plain, the upper part at present exposed, showing a rock-cut surface with a central entrance to a loculus, above which is a truncated shallow niche (VIL.7.2, VII.12.4). Panelled screen set back on the sill by 0.32 m with a single step and cyma reversa moulded base; between the antae are six broad recessed panels (Figs. 94, 101). A dressed surface on the platform above and behind, in the defined area above the tomb, is bordered by two low parallel rock-cut boundary walls H. 0.60 W. 0.48 m which are 4.27 m apart running southwards, the western showing an unfinished sarcophagus lid cut in situ in its core (Fig. 304).” These may have had built isodomic work above which has not survived. Evidence for an intended screen is provided by a 0.38m gap in the western wall, which may represent the original thickness of a long single orthostat (Fig. 246). IL5.4 Observations

‘The known measurements of the inscription found in 1915 do not compare with those of the blocks forming the temenos wall ofN. 1, confirming that it is from elsewhere (1.5.1). The name “Pomponi’ occurs in a Roman inscription in the Cyrene Agora,” and may be connected with this The name ‘Mampinianus’ is unknown, but may refer to a senator.” No evidence is apparent for later Roman burials or disfigurement of Tomb N. 1 by funeral bust niches. The shaft was possibly covered by a large slab approx. L. 2.50 W. 1.12 Th.0.27 m, based on the riser of the crepidoma step (Figs. 83-84, 96-97). The five klinai may originally have been placed as a row of three, with a single one at right-angles at each end (Figs. 102, 295). The burial artifacts were unique in the number of calcite vessels deposited, and the large ribbed amphora (Figs. 85-86). Local wares are * 7. ?* ®

Ant. Dept. Cyr. Phs. F. 338340. Cassels (1955), 26. Romanelli (1961), 97 Fig 1 Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 65; LRC.,J. Reynolds in preparation.

119

noticeably lacking from this assemblage, as was the case in Norton's Sarcophagus No.1 and the Aslaia tomb (14.1 March report; Fig. 266)."* The temple Tomb N. 1 bis.1 was terraced into the hillside and the cyma reversa mouldings on the stepped base were not cut on the southern side away from the road (Fig. 97). Its construction compares with the smaller Tomb N. 52 which is double-level but has a single compartment (Figs. 34, 240, 243). The tomb seems to have gained deep family significance; this is emphasised by the building of a high enclosure or temenos wall. It is unusual to find a built tomb enclosure isolating a rectangular tomb, as if this had the alternative function of a burial precinct. The interior area of the enclosure shows no signs of any subsequent tomb, although there would have been adequate room for another parallel rectangular tomb to the south. The site of the old temple Tomb N. 1 bis.1 was upgraded to appear as a magnificent modern circular tomb with a commanding view from the road (Figs. 91, 96-97, 99). To achieve this, the north enclosure wall was partly destroyed and the ridged tomb roof removed, leaving the panelled doorslabs in situ, but the stepped base was cut away at the corners to make room for the outside drum (Figs. 97, 102-103). Retaining the remains of rectangular Tomb N. 1 bis.1 inside the modern circular Tomb N. 1 seems an unusual economy. It should have had a burial chamber similar to that of Tomb E. 161 which is in the same architectural style (Figs. 134-136). ‘The roof, constructed of irregular-shaped stone slabs resting on top of the truncated walls to support the tiles above, would make subsequent access difficult, the only other option for burial being the shaft and subterranean chamber situated underneath the circular tomb (Figs. 83-84, 96-97). I suggest that the tomb belonged to a family already prosperous and important in Cyrene, and for this reason the enclosure wall was later constructed, making it easily noticed as one approached Cyrene from Apollonia. A later generation built an even more imposing tomb, and placed the five klinai in the southern part of the enclosure interior, as if the family was venerating its illustrious ancestors; the shaft and subterranean burial seem to represent the burial place of the descendant who was responsible for Tomb N. 1. There was later an alteration in the klinai arrangement, moving them to the eastern quarter of the enclosure, the space vacated being used for a continuous step as a bench around the walls (Figs. 84, 96). The tomb was respected throughout the Roman period, as no violation of the burials took place, nor were any niches cut in Tomb N. 1, raising the possibility that it was connected with a name still well-known in Roman times. The small pillar stele found in the shaft bears a name unknown on public monuments elsewhere in Cyrene, according to Oliverio, and is unlikely to be connected with the tomb (11.5.1; Fig. 256). Burial artifacts from the rectangular tomb included a portrait ring seal (Fig. 89) which could be significant, depending upon the identification of its subject as Queen Berenike II ¢.273-221 B.C. The panelled orthostat of Tomb N. 1 bis.2 compares with that used on Tomb N. 34, and was probably contemporary with it, as both show broad recessed panels (Figs. 88, 94, 100-101). The dressed surface in the defined area of Tomb N. 34 may represent an unused function as a burial precinct (Figs. 243, 246). It seems that the site of Tomb N. 401 forecourt was occupied by an earlier Acolic porticoed tomb, apparently cut as one of a pair, with Tomb N. 2 being the surviving part (Fig. 103). This would account for the interrupted alignment of the range of Acolic Tombs N. 2-4 which border the ancient road (Figs. 67, 81), Its former imposing facade constructed against the rock face is out of keeping with the insignificant burial chamber behind (Figs. 92, 101). The fagade originally resembled that of rock-cut Tomb N. 181, which shows the same feature of a false panelled doorslab in the chambranle in"© Uhlenbrock (1988), 107 Figs. 4.5. ?* Pacho (1827) Pl. ΧΧΧΠ. "= Bacchielli (1995b), 239-248,

120

cluding a low orthostat screen above (Fig. 226). The small chamber was probably intended to be cut as a wide chamber loculus system, as those of Tombs N. 181 and N. 357, which may have been intended to have a defined area behind which was never built (Figs. 81, 224, 226). The shallow niche above the entrance of the adjoining Tomb N. 34 indicates an earlier phase as it was subsequently truncated by the cutting of the sill for the base of the later panelled orthostat screen (Figs. 93, 101, 103).

‘A structural sequence of events has been isolated:

Note: other phases (Figs. 66, 77-80) Phase: Archaic-Classical 5 Cutting of Aeolic Tombs N. 2-4 bordering the ancient road (Figs. 78, 103) 7 Cutting of Tomb N. 34 forecourt, loculus and building of a superstructure (Fig. 103)

Classical-Hellenistic 9. Construction of Tomb N. 1 bis.1 terraced into hillside, later enclosed by temenos wall (Fig. 102). 11 Destruction of Aeolic tomb, cutting and building of Tomb N. 401 (Figs. 79, 103). 12 Destruction of north temenos wall and removal of roof to Tomb N. 1 bis.1; construction of circular Tomb N. 1. Placing of five klinai in primary position; later cutting of subterranean chamber shaft and rearrangement of klinai (Figs. 102-103). 13 Construction of panelled orthostats for Tomb N. 1 bis.2 and later Tombs N. 34 and N. 14 (Figs. 103, 243),

Roman 19 Cutting of ossuary niches in Tombs N. 2 portico and N. 401 chamber (Figs. 76, 101, 300).

Rowz's Toms M.8, assets N. 57 11.6.1 Historical Background

Smith and Porcher photographed the eastern slope of Wadi Haleg Shaloof in January 1861, The terrain between road and tomb is covered in hillwash, which in 1908 lay against its eastern side." In ca.1915 one of Tassoni’s soldiers cut graffiti on the roof: W793. The extent of the hillwash on the exterior was clearly shown in 1937 obscuring the base and a possible enclosure of rock-cut sarcophagi."” In 1825 Pacho drew elevations of the northern and western sides, and a detail of the architectural style (1.2.2). Maioletti made a series of interpretative drawings in 1924 and 1931 of this and the surrounding tombs."* This may be the reason for Tombs N. 58-59 being clear of debris, revealing the walls of the adjoining square defined area above Tomb N. 59. The tomb was again ‘planned’ by Rowe according to his notes in 1952; he recorded also the eastern elevation when the reinstated doorslab was still in situ. No reference was made to the fact that it had already been cleared by Burton Brown (1.4.2; Fig. 107). Cassels commented that the two isodomic courses showing Tomb N. 57 which lies 13.50m from the ancient road (Figs. 20-23, 34, 104).

© %™ ?" ?* © ?* "©

Bacchiell (1980), 31 Fig. 26. Cassels Arch. Blue Book fols. 20, 36. Ghislanzoni (1915) Pl. 52; Stucchi (1975) Tav. IV. Gregory (1909) Pl. opp.4 Enciclopedia Italiana X (1931) PL. CX (τὺ; Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ph. 7383-2968 (dated 26.11.38) Maioletti (1930), 579 Tav. G; (19512),580 Fig. 4; (1931b), 329-331 Figs. 9-11. Fairman Arch, Rowe’s 1955 Day Book, list; Rowe I, 20 Fig. VII

121

forming a cuthynteria immediately above Tomb N. 58 were ‘lengthened after first being built’; these are behind the original alignment of the free-standing built facade entablature on the site of the revetment wall or screen (Fig. 108)."° At the southern end of the forecourt the boundary wall alignment is cut by a terraced road W. 2.45, 3.10 m, bordered by ancient boundary stones continuing down in the same direction, which is also respected by Tomb N. 68 lower down the slope (Figs. 34, 104).

11.6.2 Archaeological Work

A dislodged block-cut chest sarcophagus on the surface may have originated from the clearance of hillwash and debris around this tomb (VIL16.4; Fig. 104). A long trench had been dug probably by Burton Brown on the eastern side of the tomb and the interior cleared, although no burial artifacts were published, or known by Rowe (Figs. 37, 107). 11.6.3 Structural Description N. 58 Forecourt rock-cut, L. 6.10 W. 7.00 m with boundary walls (Figs. 104, 106). Facade originally free-standing on a wide step, suggested by the surviving debris of structural elements, such as a fluted pilaster from the colonnade between four loculi entrances, and parts of the cornice showing a lion's head for the Doric entablature, similar in style to the nearby Tomb. N. 65 which had a screen above (Figs. 9, 34, 219)."” Interior: uncut Loc.1 shows a recess with two Roman funeral bust niches above the entrance; Locs.2-3 seem primary with triple and double levels; Loc. 4 shows secondary alterations with the addition of another loculus by the side forming an interconnecting pair (Figs. 104, 219).

N. 57 is a complete entity showing a panelled orthostat method of construction H. 2.47 Euthynteria The tomb is built on a flat, quarried surface but its west wall overlooking Tomb

L. 6.54 W. 2.20 m with no indication that an enclosing temenos wall had been built (Fig. 107).

N. 58 rests on an inserted euthynteria of two isodomic courses H. 0.23; 0.43 L. 7.30m confined to

the original entablature sill" Between this tomb and the wall to the defined area of Tomb N. 59 is a space of 0.81 m, representing a common boundary. The triple-stepped base reduces in height towards the moulded course, with offsets staying constant (Fig. 106). The upper base course shows recessive moulding and cyma reversa; this course continues through the wall thickness, projecting into the compartment by 0.06 m as a chamfered sill to support the separator slabs. Orthostats are placed on the upper base course, with four panels on each side and one at the end which has fallen outwards, L. 6.02 H. 1.03 Th. 0.42 m, each flanking side decorated with twentyeight recessed panels. The lengths of the individual flanking orthostat pieces range between 1.60 to 1.74, with a small slab 0.99 m, weight 1.725-1.876 tonnes, 1.698-1.846 tons. The end orthostat

is L. 1.18 m, weight 1.272 tonnes, 1.252 tons and shows three recessed panels, bordered by an-

other at each end cut into the returns of the side orthostats. Above runs a continuous architrave with taenia, regulae and six guttae with cymatium of cyma recta, At the eastern end the entrance ??. © ?? ?? ™

Cassels Asch. Phs. 40, 174, 253; Cassels (1955), 26; Bacchielli (1994), 102. Rowe II, 28 Note. Pacho (1827) Pl. XXXIL Maioletti (1931b) Fig. 12. Rowe Arch. Phs. 7, 27, 249, 251; Uncini (1985), 95 PI. 7.IIL2; Cassels (1955) Fig. XIIIa.

122

pierces the steps; the door slab is incomplete, with recessed panels (Fig. 292). Roof shows seven ‘labs in sta with space for another at the southern end. These have chamfered flanges atthe sides, which abut the adjoining slabs. The surviving pediment at the northern end shows a recessed tympanum surmounted by a raking cornice, central acroterion and two acroteria at the comers. Along the ridge of the raking cornice are four small square sockets 0.025 m sq D.0.02 m. A plinth runs along the roof ridge with a series of sockets cut into four slabs (Fig. 297). Interior is a single com: partment with dressed rock-cut floor H. 2.00 L. 5.26 W. 0.94 m divided into two levels judging by the chamfered sill, the lowerH. 0.95,W. 0.94 the upper H. 1.03 W. 1.03 m. A vertical slotH. 1.03 W. 0.42 D.0.12 m divides the upper level into two parts, but evidence for a lower divider is only indicated by a slot in the chamfered sill. No divider or separator slabs now survive (Fig. 107) N. 59 A large forecourt with rock-cut boundary walls, the free-standing facade L. 5.80 m now missing (Fig. 106). Three loculi were originally intended, the left one uncut and the central one converted to four lateral loculi (Fig. 232). On the site of the entablature sill are two courses of isodomic work for a screen, now lost. Above and behind is a defined area contained by an isodomic wall on three sides with inward-chamfered coping H. 2.10 L. 5.30 W. 5.10 m. No burial features are apparent inside this area because of its filling of terra rossa (Fig. 104) 11.6.4 Observations

The architectural style of Tomb N. 57 is the same as Tomb N. 201, but the latter differs in its interior arrangement (Figs, 105-106, 120, 123, 243). It was constructed symmetrically above and behind the earlier free-standing Doric facade of Tomb N. 58, with the latter's entablature and screen removed and replaced by a euthynteria (Fig. 108). No evidence survives of built isodomic walls to form a defined area, which would have disappeared with the construction of Tomb N. 57. This new arrangement recalls isodomic Doric temple Tomb 8.185, built immediately above a facade loculus tomb (Fig. 240). A structural sequence of events has been isolated: Phase: Classical-Hellenistic 1 Construction of Doric facade loculus Tomb N. 58 with screen and defined area (Fig. 108). 2 Removal of screen and entablature of Tomb N. 58 and construction of shrine Tomb N. 57 (Fig. 108). Rowe's Tomas M. 3, N. 198, N. 198A, N. 198B; Cassets N. 197, N. 198 11.7.1 Historical Background

‘A shallow valley called El Mawy land, east of Wadi Haleg Shaloof, cut across by the ancient road, was shown by Beechey in May 1822 to have a wall for water catchment." A general view of. the eastern slope was taken by Norton's 1911 expedition"? and another later by the Italians from ?* Ghislanzoni (1915), 158 PI. 79; Cassels Arch, Blue Book fol. 14. ?* Beechey (1828) Pl. opp.404. ?" Norton (1911) PL LXVIL.

123

above Tomb N. 198. Rock-cut Tomb N. 197 on the western slope, unspectacular because of hill wash, was excavated by Rowe during two successive campaigns (Fig. 109)."" The 1952 campaign excavated one of the three loculi of ‘Tomb M.3’, at the end of which is a niche that Rowe claimed in a newspaper article contained originally a cinerary um, based on its shape and the fact that ‘A few fragments of the ribbed black-varnished urn and of its lid were actually found as also were some parts of the artifical chaplet or wreath placed around its neck’, the latter republished in his final report. A year later Cassels registered this as Tomb N. 197 and recorded part of the fallen entablature, mentioning that ‘some painting survives’ on the small frieze element of the cornice coloured red." He also recorded in his notes some of the artifacts from Loc.3 with sketches and annotations. Hydria rim fragment M. 93 ‘orig black - drn by hand in light relief. Fragment of Panathenaic amphora M. 87 ‘thin (3mm) rather coarse red clay, black pt; & black inside."® He discussed the inscriptions above Locs.2-3, which were also translated (VIL8.1).” In Rowe's second campaign in 1955 he continued to excavate this tomb, which he identified erroneously as Tomb N. 198, the number given by Cassels to the adjoining tomb. ‘This is apparent when one compares the field notes in Rowe’s 1955 Day Book, from which extracts

have been taken

(Figs. 109, 115, 117), In 1995 a copy of an inked drawing showing the range of

tombs with pencilled annotations, the only known pre-publication record, was found in the History Department Map Room at Manchester University and passed to Professor Barri Jones."* 11.7.2 Archaeological Work Rowe's Tomb M.3, Cassels N. 197

‘The 1952 campaign mainly concentrated on removing hillwash covering the sarcophagus behind the tomb entablature and tracing the steps leading down (Figs. 110, 304), cutting a trench in front of the loculi entrances (Fig. 111);" then excavating Loc3, finding: black-glazed ribbed hydria and ‘its lid’ M. 92-93; fragments of the ‘chaplet’ or funerary wreath ‘of bronze wire’ M. 73; ‘berries of faience M.72; ‘leaves and flowers’ M. 75; ‘iron fittings from coffin’ M82; ‘heads ofcoloured terracotta figurines of women in “Tanagra” style’ M. 67, 89-90; ‘tear-bottle’ M.86; ‘part of an iron bracelet’ M. 77; ‘ivory hairpin’ M. 79; ‘bronze mirror’ M.80; ‘lamps and juglets’; "" Frags of incinerated bones from cinerary urn’ M. 68; ‘Certain of the objects must have belonged to intrusive burials’ (Assem.VI; Figs. 116, 309). Rowr's Toms N. 198, Cassets N. 197 Extracts from Day Book. Rowe returned to this tomb for a second campaign, and on 23rd

September 1955 the forecourt of Tomb N. 197 began to be cleared of hillwash and debris (Figs. 110, 116). ‘In courtyard debris were: Small coin Roman M. 246, frags of black painted ware badly Arch. Phs. 148-151; Rowe ITP. 3a. ?"?* Rowe Rowe (1952b), 10. ? Rowe I, 22. Cassels Arch. Grey Book fol. 51; Blue Book fol. 21. "Cassels Arch, Grey Book fols. 10-11 © Cassels (1955), 20; Rowe I, 22; SEG XVI 869a-b. δ Jones Arch. Mise., dyeline original with annotations, author's copy; Rowe II Fig. VII 77 Rowe Arch. Phs. 224-230, 308-309; Rowe I Fig. X; II PL 3a, ° Rowe Arch. Phs. 286-288, 230; Rowe (1952b), 10. 7 Rowe Il, 27 ™ Rowe I, 22.

124

fired, part of amphora base, nozzle of lamp M. 252, iron coffin nail with broad head’ M. 242 and “frag of undec ware’ (Assem. XIX; Fig. 323). Also there were ‘traces of ashes or of burning of some

kind’, which could be accounted for by the cooking vessels found in the area M. 250a-d, M. 254.

‘In front of loculus 1. . upper part of doorslab. Nearby were frags of black painted ware (M. 261) and a broken cup with small handle M. 240. Also frag of lead vessel M. 243. In front of loculi 1 and 2.. some fallen blocks’ are most likely to be elements from the entablature and screen (Fig. 289).

"Between the doors of loculi 2 and 3, and before the ledge in courtyard, were (about ledge level) some ‘frags of a marble stele’ M.238, a fragment of which was found in the previous campaign and recorded by a photograph." By 29th September the loculus sarcophagus in the forecourt had been cleared (Figs. 112, 304). In the lower level ‘a complete glass vase came from its broken entrance (M.259). Inside were tiny frags of pottery, bone etc.’and in the register a ‘glass bottle for scent M. 260° (Assem. XX; Fig. 323 no. 260). The tomb itself still contained in situ the lower part of Loc. 1 doorslab, exposed during the 1952 campaign (Fig. 291).'! On October Ist ‘Loculus T'was cleared *. . frags of 2 lamps M. 289, of spindle vases M. 295-301, a small cup M.292 etc." Also a ‘quantity of faience beads, gilded bronze, and imitation buds in bronze -- all part of a funerary wreath M. 304... Some nails of iron, and also what appears to be a decorative (2) of iron, were found; these once belonged to a wooden coffin, of which no traces were foundM. 303; in the register: ‘19 buds from ditto and frag of wood from coffin M.305° (Assem. XXIV; Figs. 325-327 nos. 281.314). On the same day ‘Loculus 2 -- Upper debris removed — only 1 slab’ in situ ‘(from back)’, which ‘was found and removed‘. No reference is made to the finding of artifacts, but in the register appear “116 beads from a funerary wreath M. 315, glass frags from tear bottles etc. including a spout M.316, handle of vase M. 317, Frag leadM. 318, Frags of nails etc. from wooden coffin M.319, Frags of large: - Mirror; 2 leaves from funerary wreath; pendant (2) 4 nails etc. M. 320, Miscellaneous (1) pieces of wire etc. (2) 2 ring stones glass M. 321 (Assem.XXV; Figs. 328-329 nos. 315-323)... mouth of amphora in 2 parts, pomegranates painted on lip. Black painted M.342' (Assem. XXV; Figs. 330-331 πος. 324-353) with registered fragments unpublished (Assem XXVI; Fig. 332 nos. 354-365), except for unguentaria and lamps."

Rowe's Tomb N. 198A On October 3rd the forecourt, between Tombs N. 197-198, was partly cleared of structural debris, revealing a dislodged block-cut chest sarcophagus and some untraced artifacts (Assem. XXIII; Figs. 113, 324). The rock-cut sarcophagus case on the northern side of the forecourt was cleared the next day (Figs. 109, 114). On October 5th the exterior was exposed; ‘against case’ on the northern side in situ, ‘at 170cm below top came a flat stone with 2 oles’ representing Slab Y, with ‘below small.. pots’ (Assem. XXII; Fig. 324 nos. 267-272). Later ‘another slab’was found in situ ‘with a large bole in it (all through) with large stopper’: Slab X remains abandoned on site (Figs. 117, 221, 262).^*

?? 7? ?* » ?* © ?*

Rowe Rowe Rowe Rowe Rowe Rowe Rowe Rowe

Arch. Phs. 286-287; Assem. XIX; Artifacts Catalogue Fig. 323. Object Register (1955), 7, entered on 26th Sept. Arch. Ph. 309; Rowe II 6 Fig. VII Arch. Ph. 308; Rowe Object Register (1955), 9-10, entered on 30th Sept; Rowe I Fig. X; II Fig. VI. Object Register (1955), 10, enteredon 30th Sept; Thorn (1994), 111 Figs. 7-8. Object Register (1955), 11-13, entered on 9-10th Oct; Rowe II PL 3c. Object Register (1955), 8, entered on 29-30th Sept, 31d Oct; Rowe Arch. Phs. 231-237. II, 14 Pls 4a-b; Thorn (1994), 115.

125 11.7.3 Structural Description Rowe's Tomb N. 198, Cassels N. 197

Forecourt terraced into the hillside L. 5.33 W. 3.10m, open on the side opposite the facade, the limits defined by a quarryman’s channelling trench. A step runs round three sides H. 0.44 W. 041m. Rowe's ‘grave’ on the eastern side is below the truncated steps and sarcophagus (Figs 112, 304). Fagade rock-cut, three loculus entrances with surrounds and cymatium, originally with a built Doric entablature on a sill with a rock-cut screen above (Figs. 110-111, 289), Loc. 1 still containing the lower half of its doorslab (Fig. 291). Loc. 2 threshold differs by lacking a raised offset. Loc. 3 has a vessel niche at the rear to receive a hydria, later altered to a composite cinerarium niche (Figs. 116, 300). Above the entrances to Locs. 2-3 below the cymatium are inscriptions (VIL8.1). Above Loc. 1 and behind the entablature is ‘a crude flat-topped sarcophagus made for a woman, as the badly broken inscription on its side indicates’ (Figs. 110, 116, 304)" Rowe’s N. 198A Forecourt full of hillwash and debris. A rock-cut sarcophagus (Fig. 114) defines the northern limit of the forecourt and point of access at the north-west corner. The tomb

facade is still buried.

Rowe's N. 1988, Cassels N. 198 Forecourt and most of the facade buried in hillwash. Five

loculus entrances show a continuous cymatium above (Figs. 115, 116).

A built entablature has

three thin decorative isodomic courses H. 0.24 L. 1.58 m which are identical to those on Tomb

N. 183 and Rowe's Tomb M. 15 (Figs. 96, 220-221).* 11.7.4 Observations

‘The forecourt ‘grave’ of Tomb N. 197 may represent a loculus sarcophagus which at some

time had a tabular lid, truncating the base of the earlier staircase (Figs. 117, 257). The quarry-

man's channelling trench in the forecourt could be for standing orthostats, demonstrated by an unregistered example by Tomb N. 86 which has recessed panels between posts (Fig. 116). The facade shows plain doorslabs whose panels gave a painted trompe l'ceil effect, with evidence on the

entablature for a painted frieze, identical to the interior facades in Western Necropolis tombs

(Figs. 220, 226). The insertion of the block sarcophagus in the defined area seems to emulate the

nearby tomb in the vicinity of Blundell Tomb D (Figs. 116, 222, 246).

Rowe thought that some artifacts from Tomb N. 197 Loc.3 were significant by originating

from the vessel niche (Fig. 116). This contained ribbed hydria M.93, consisting of a rim fragment and two shoulder handles, which he claimed had a 'chaple? around its neck, based on funeral

wreath fragments M.72-73, 75 and compared it with an example from the Sciatbi Necropolis in the Graeco-Roman Museum at Alexandria; being the Conservator he would probably have been

very familiar with this piece (Fig. 274). An identical ribbed hydria rim fragment was found in

Loc.1 (Assem. XXIV; Fig. 325 no. 287). The niche which Rowe claimed had been used for the hydria had been radically altered in the Roman period as a cinerarium niche similar to those cut in

™ » % τα

Rowe I, 22 Fig. X. Rowe II Pl. 4c. Cassels (1955) Pls. IVa, VIId. Rowe Arch. Phs. 229-230, 235, 310; Rowe I Pl 3b. Breccia (1912), 273 Fig, 183; Rowe I, 22.

126

Tomb N. 10 Locs. 1-2 with a notch for a stone cover slab which truncated the outline of the vessel niche. On the surround of the now square niche are small drilled holes which indicate that some form of framed cover was used, possibly wooden, which it is tempting to imagine may have had a painted portrait (Figs. 261, 300). The figurine from Loc. 3 (Assem. VI; Fig. 309 no. 89) is identical to another from Tomb N. 83-BF Loc. 2 pointing to contemporary burial practice in both tombs (Assem. LXI; Fig. 345 no. 566). A structural sequence of events has been isolated: Phase:

Classical-Hellenistic 1 Quarrying of Tomb N. 197, with steps leading up into a defined area (Figs. 109, 116) 2 Insertion of block sarcophagus in defined area of Tomb N. 197 (Figs. 116, 304) 3 Quarrying of Tomb N. 198, cutting of Rowe's SarcophagusN. 198A (Figs. 109, 116-117) 4 Quarrying of Rowe’s Tomb N. 198A with a forecourt (Figs. 109, 117, 221) 5 Cutting of Loculus Sarcophagus N. 197 against hillside, truncating the lower steps (Figs. 117, 304) 6 Placing of Rowe's libation slabs against Rowe's Sarcophagus N. 198A (Figs. 109, 116-117, 262) Roman. 7 Tomb N. 197 host to later inhumation and cremation burials (Fig. 261) Islamic 8 Lost Umayyad coin weight, an indication of trade, in Rowe's Tomb N. 198 Loc. 2 (Fig. 329 no. x) Rowz's Tomps M. 6 AND 2; Cassets N. 201 AND 202 11.8.1 Historical Background

On the eastern slope of the area known locally as El Mawy land is Rowe's Tomb M. 2, one of a group of rectangular built tombs which are stepped down and along the hillside interspersed with rock-cut loculus tombs, eventually meeting the ancient road. The first illustration of this tomb may be an erroneous one by Cervelli in 1811-12, where included on his published drawing was inscription CIG 5151 from the architrave of a nearby loculus tomb (Fig. 121). He gave the length as ‘six brasses’ (9.72m), the width as ‘deux et demie (4.05 m) and the orthostat as ‘quatorze ’palmes' (1.40 m). His dimensions seem exaggerated, except for the size of the orthostat, which would be compatible with that of this tomb. A published view was taken in 1907 from the road, then used as a caravan route,'® and a similar view was published six years later by Norton."* A study close to Tomb N. 202 was taken by Norton on 10th January 1911 and in c. 1915 by the Italians showing the undisturbed hillwash which Rowe encountered when he excavated the interior (Figs. 121, 124)."° From here three other built tombs cut across the head of the wadi (Fig. 118). One of these, Rowe's Tomb M. 6 which he surveyed, still has four roof slabs in situ (Figs. 119-120, 123).'” Further round on the western slope are Tombs N. 198-197 which Rowe excava-

ted during two campaigns (Figs. 109-117)

?*. Cassels Arch. Phs. 122, 149. ?*. Cervelli (1825), 26 Pl. 1,5; De Martino (1908) Pls. on pp. 39,55. ?* Norton (1911), 157 PL LXVII; Rowe Arch. Phs. 153-155. "5 Neg. no. 11.602 (Museum of Fine Arts Archive, Boston); Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ph. 2555; E. 887;Ph. 24; F. 9; Maioletti (19312) Arch. Ph. 33. "^ Ant. Fig. Dept.3; Cyr.Cassels Ph. 2381, 2966 (dated 21.11.38); Cassels (1955) Pl. IIIa τα Jowert Arch. Notebook fols. 11, 19 Pb. A.74 Album 457 (dated 22.9.1949),

127 11.8.2 Archaeological Work

Rowe’s Tomb M. 6, Cassels N. 201 Fallen roof and separator slabs within the compartment's lower level remain undisturbed although interior is relatively free of hillwash (Fig. 123)."* Rowe’s Tomb M. 2, Cassels N. 202 Exterior stepped base cleared, hillwash D. 0.66 m inside northern compartment removed, finding a ‘massive silver ring with defaced seal M. 55,"° frag. ments of red-figured pelike M. 59 and other burial artifacts (Assem.V; Fig. 308 nos. 54-62). 11.8.3 Structural Description

Rowe’s Tomb M. 6, Cassels N. 201 Rectangular built tomb with no evidence for an enclosure except for a row of boundary stones running down the hillside (Figs. 119-120, 123). Euthynteria of three isodomic courses built against a low rock outcrop on the western side of the slope, each course showing bevelled vertical and horizontal joints. On the sill of the top course along the side of the tomb is a series of weathered pryholes used in its construction. The triple-stepped base reduces in height towards the moulded course, the offsets staying constant and the upper two courses showing recessive mouldings. The middle base course continues through the thickness, forming a projecting chamfered sill on the interior; the upper base course shows a cyma reversa. A single entrance piercing the steps at the northern end has a chambranle with ascendants and a broken panelled doorslab lying outwards, similar to that used in Rowe's Tomb M. 8 which is incomplete (Figs. 123, 292). Orthostats originally placed four on each side on the upper base course; one on the south-east corner has fallen. The lengths of individual flanking orthostats range between

1.38-1.52m,

weight 2.098-2.311

tonnes

(2.065-2.274

tons), Each

flanking side is decorated with nineteen recessed panels ending in antae with cavetto capital and abacus, L. 5.72 H. 1.22 Th. 0.50 m. The southern end slab has disappeared, L. (1.47) m, weight

(2.249) tonnes (2.213) tons. Above the panels runs a continuous architrave with taenia, regulae

and six guttae with a cymatium of cyma recta. Roof incomplete, the four slabs remaining in position have chamfered flanges at the sides, which abut the adjoining slabs. Each shows on the cornice edge an astragal, and a plinth W. 0.60 m running along the ridge rests on an anathyrosis on top of the orthostats (Figs. 119, 123). Interior has a single compartment without a central divider, with continuous chamfered sills which had originally supported separator slabs, now dislodged (Fig. 123).

N. 202, Rowe's M. 2 Rectangular built tomb on the northern side of an open forecourt terraced into the hillside for a rock-cut tomb facade on the southern side, now buried in hillwash, bordered by rock-cut sarcophagi on the eastern boundary. Tomb N.202 is enveloped in hillwash and only exposed on the western side (Figs. 121-122, 124). Euthynteria H. 0.95 L. 8.50 W. 0.80 m, the lower two courses of natural limestone showing a roughly cut gully W. 0.10 m on the sill of the lower course and a cut rebate at the south — western end L. 0.81 W. 0.24 D. 0.16 m for a slab stele. Above is a stepped base of two inserted isodomic courses against a rock-cut rebated core, the upper course showing an apophyge with cyma reversa (Figs. 121-122). Orthostats each form one side of the tomb, dispensing with entrances and mak?* ?* ?? ?

Rowe Rowe Rowe Rowe

Arch. Phs. 6, 26, 28, 123; Rowe I, 20 Fig. VI; II, 28 note. (1952b), 10. Arch. Phs. 50, 160, 273-274, 284-285; Rowe I, 9: Il, 27. Arch. Phs. 24-25, 250; Rowe I, 19 Fig. IV.

128

ing the tomb completely enclosed; the western exposed side H. 1.46 L.7.26 W. 0.65 m, weight 16.910 tonnes, 16.637 tons. The longer sides return to sandwich the end orthostats, L. 2.34 m, weight 5.490 tonnes, 5.363 tons, showing astragal and cymatium of cyma recta which continues around four sides. Roof consists of eight out of the original twelve pairs of roof lintel stones These have chamfered flanges at the sides, which abut the adjoining slabs. The central plinth astride the ridge has irregular edges, indicating that rearrangement of the whole roof had occurred (Fig. 124). Interior consists of two compartments with a central dividing wall H. 1.56 L. 5.95 W. 0.56 m of irregular-shaped pieces of ashlar forming a butt joint against the rear faces of the orthostats, adjusted at the southern end by 0.05 m to bring it level with the top of the southern orthostat for the roof lintel stones to be properly bedded. The western compartment has been cleared of hillwash revealing a rock-cut floor, and at the southern end a square floor grave L. 1.24 'W. 0.78 D. 0.28 m; halfway along the compartment length is a free-standing vertical divider slab Η.

0.95 W. 0.95 Th. 0.34m.

11.8.4 Observations

Bevelled horizontal and vertical joints in the lower two courses of the euthynteria of Tomb N. 201 show that the north-west corner was built first, after which three blocks were set against it in each course, the upper with another piece as a header to form a return. The exposed sill shows ἃ row of much-weathered pry-holes along its length close to the base of the tomb, a method of construction commonly noticed in other Hellenistic structures.” The architectural style of panelled orthostats is the same as in Tomb N. 57 (Fig. 107), but the interior arrangement is entirely different, as the lower level is confined more in the area of the euthynteria below the entrance sill (Figs. 123, 243). It is likely, considering Tomb N. 57 and on stylistic grounds, that Tomb N. 201 originally had pediments at each end (Fig. 105). Cassels mistook Rowe's Tomb M. 6 for Tomb N. 206 which has an identical appearance from the ancient road but is, in fact, not a temple tomb but a burial precinct, showing the characteristic coping stones on its orthostat temenos wall (Figs. 239, 246).” Measurements for Tomb N. 202 orthostats have already been given (IL8.3); they are heavier than those of Tomb N. 206, which show the same mouldings H. 1.45 L. 7.16 Th. 0.55 m, weight 14.230 tonnes (14.005 tons). The flanking slabs are H. 1.18 L. 2.14 m, weight 3.462 tonnes (3.406 tons). These orthostats represent probably the largest pieces of stone to be used for such tombs. Transporting these colossal slabs and lifting them into position would have been a formidable engincering feat. In comparison, no public monument in Cyrene can boast such enormous orthostats — larger even than those of the Zeus Temple. Access must have been through the roof ἃς its lintel stones were relatively easy to remove; this would account for their confused rearrangement (Figs. 121, 124). On the basis of their being primarily laid in pairs, each pair would have its own unique body width. A study of the roof confirmed that this was so, and that the plinth was originally cut only on one side of the tomb on eight continuous lintel stones. The interior of Tomb N.206 shows a separate orthostat-built tomb constructed of blocks identical in shape to those used as a boundary line by Tomb N.201, which was seen to continue down the wadi in the direction of the former tomb (Figs. 118, 246).

7? Hodge (1975), 333-347 Pls 56-57. » Cassels (1955), 28, 43.

129 EASTERN NECROPOLIS Rowe's Tomas E. 161-A, E. 161; Cassets E. 160, E. 161 11.9.1 Historical Background

An ancient track ran eastwards from Cyrene via Wadi Sneidi to circular Tomb E. 161, past which it gently slopes downwards (Fig. 125)."* At this point there is a commanding view to the north over the plateau, where on the horizon the more imposing mounds of Tombs E.13, 15-16 and 170 can be seen (Fig. 128). Evidence of Italian presence is provided by military graffiti, probably by Tassoni's soldiers, on ‘N. side, both on the blocks forming the second step, but not in the step itself (ie. not on the portion exposed & forming the step when the monument was complete). (a) about 4’ W. of ἽΝ. Projection’: WIN (b) opposite centre of N. projection 3W1907'(1.1.1).* In 1952 Alan Rowe visited the tomb in his first campaign and a year later, prior

to its subsequent excavation (Fig. 127), Cassels visited the tomb, noting the appearance of the tu-

mulus in his field notes: ‘Wedge shaped blocks of?roof to be seen in quantity in situ — but in that case the slope is pretty steep'. He also recorded that there was an adjoining tomb E. 160 ‘in definite relationship with E. 161. Its foundation is built right up to tbe sq.podlium]. What is to be seen is upright slabs, two absent, on top of 3 parallel walls: it looks like a particular solid podium] to a normal BLuilt] tomb” Rowe's second campaign in 1955 recorded the existence of a boundary wall which presently can be traced to the east of Tomb E.160-161, running at right angles from the ancient road for about 60 m as far as a heap of isodomic blocks belonging to Tomb E. 158, where a partly buried headless half-figure, possibly the one seen by Cassels, still survives." The boundary wall seems to be isodomic, standing in places two courses high, the blocks of which are H. 0.40 L. 130 W. 0.66 m. This fragmentary wall may have no relevance to the tombs as there is no evidence for a corresponding parallel wall. The ruins of a rectangular building terraced into the opposite bank of the ancient road were identified by Rowe as a tomb, which in his 1955 Day Book he reconstructed as a panelled shrine tomb, but I could find no positive evidence that this had been such a structure (Fig. 130). In spring 1956, Richard Tomlinson visited Tombs E. 160-161, photographing them after Rowe's excavation. Both tombs were re-assessed by Professor Stucchi who produced a series of reconstructions as he envisaged them in Phase 2, based on Rowe’s original published account. The tombs within this area are at present preserved in the orchard of Abderrahim Mohammed Larbid.” 1.9.2 Archaeological Work Rowe’s ANNEXE TOMB Ἐ, 161-A, Cassets E. 160 Extracts from Day Book fols.1-10, 18 On 4th September excavations were begun at the northern end of the tomb at the junction with the crepidoma of Tomb E.161, clearing part of the western compartment Division B. Removal of the fill at the northern end was recorded at various

7 Buttle Arch. Ph. 11/31, Thesis Pl. 92; Rowe Arch. Phs. 220-222; Rowe II Pl. 1a ° Cassels (1955), 38,42 Figs. 1, 6. Rowe Arch. Ph. 314; Fairman Arch. Rowe's 1955 Day Book fol. 16. 77. Cassels Arch. Blue Book fols. 38-39. '% Fairman Arch, Rowe's 1955 Day Book fol. 21; Cassels Arch. Blue Book fol. 38; Cassels (1955), 42; The statue mentioned was still there in May 1998 among the tomb ruins. 5) Tomlinson Arch. Phs. 22/11-13; Stucchi (1988), 321, 343 Figs. 124-125, 162-163; Thom (1994), 106 Fig. 3.

130

approximate depths using the top of the crepidoma as ἃ datum level. On the following day Rowe continued southwards under the lintel stones of Division C, and by 6th September had reached the far end of Division D. He also cleared, under the crepidoma, an area which he called the ‘passage’ in Division B, and had cleared the adjacent eastern compartments by 7th September, which are completely unrecorded as regards human remains or burial artifacts apart from the aniconic head mentioned below (Figs. 131, 133). The site of Division A was not realized, as it had been destroyed by the building of Rowe's ‘Southern Room’, incorporated into the later Tomb E. 161. The debris-retaining ‘wall δ᾽ was recorded against the southern wall of the main burial chamber. The space between ‘walls b and c probably represents the site of the destroyed Division A of the two compartments at the northern end of Tomb E. 160. Extracts have been taken from Rowe's 1955 Day Book where relevant, with the artifact numbers added where these can be identified (Figs. 132, 136). WESTERN COMPARTMENT

Division B in the register as ‘Northern sector of W passage.’ At ‘c. 6" (0.15 m): 6 fragments of coarse red pottery and a triangle of red pottery, blue within, incrusted with lime’. At ‘c. 9" (0.23 m): among broken slabs, base of small open vessel, incrusted with lime'and a ‘large incrusted fragment, c. Lem thick’. At ‘c. 18" (0.46 m): frag. of very thick coarse pottery, grey in fractures with stones, rounded edge preserved, irregular shaped frag. of rim of vessel, base of open vessel'and ‘small frag’. At ‘c. 2’ (0.61m): large rectangular fragment of large closed vessel, red clay, black glazed outside’, two ‘small frags, large frag,’and ‘frag of rim, reddish clay.’ At‘c. 2'6" (0.76 m): three frags. three ‘small frags’, one in ‘thin pottery, and ‘red pottery rim’. At ‘c. 3' (0.92 m): many frags'like those found in the 2' level, including ‘frag, of thick coarse pottery and ‘many other fragments of pottery’. ‘Additionally found at the 0.23 m level were: ‘Fragment of large open Attic vase, R-F, (M. 178) from debris on level of second step of plinth of round tomb, south flank, sector W of small tomb; fragm of ‘marble slab, c. 1.5 cm thick; small fragments of the base-moulding from the drum of the circular tomb, found well inside the W compartment of the small tomb E. 160, together with two small fragments of egg-&-tongue moulding.’ ‘It had been efficiently robbed, as the interior was a confused mass of debris, masonry and some pottery & bones, One bronze nail was also included. (N.B. most of the pottery found in the NW sector, including the fragments of the Panathenaic M. 177, came from the southern end)’ (Assem.XIV; Figs. 317-318 nos.177-181) Division C in the register as ‘Southern sector of W passage.’ ‘About 2'6" level (0.76 m) fragment of neck of Attic black-glazed vase (? Panathenaic); dislodged lintel stone ‘found in debris about half-way down; another fallen vertical roof-slab 11 ft. (3.36 m) from plinth'of E. 161 crepidoma; ‘about 2 feet in (0.61 m), a slab lying diagonally, square-cut, 70 x 50cm thick’, representing a dislodged pilaster. ‘Below it a horizontal floor-slab,’ (Assem. XIV; Fig. 318 nos. 182-184).

Division D Southern sector of W passage. ‘Head of large aniconic bust, 5 metres from roundtomb plinth, c. 10 cm above floor-slab.. found face down M. 185, which until recently had terra rossa adhering to its surface, evidently an intrusive piece; '18/r (5.49 m) from plinth, near surface, fragment of a block with leaf-&-dart moulding & fillet below, on one edge, & broad fillet, weathered but apparently was well-dressed, on adjacent edge’ (Assem. XIV; Fig. 319 no. 185).^

"2 Rowe Arch. Phs. 311-313; Rowe Object Register (1955), 1, entered on 6th Sept; Rowe (1956a), 4; Man.Mus.display panel Phs. 1-3 (before cleaning, excavation photographs, negatives now lost); Rowe Il,5 Fig. IPI. 2a-c (after cleaning) .

131 EASTERN COMPARTMENT

Division B in the register as 'E passage’. "About 5° (1.53 m) from plinth of 161 i.e. under tion of missing flat slab, fragments of black-glazed Attic pottery M. 187a-e, M. 188-189, incl. with rays (from base?) M. 186 & part of a handle; pendant of “aqua marina” ot peridot M. small frag. of marble M. 190 and two fragments of limestone’ (Assem. XIV; Fig. 319 186-192).

posipart 192; nos.

Rowz's Tons E. 161, Cassets E. 161

Extracts from Day Book fols.1-2, 7, 14-42 Excavation commenced with clearance of the south-east comer of the crepidoma on 3rd September, after which he concentrated his efforts on g the adjacent tomb (Figs. 133-134).

From 8th-12th September he was clearing Areas A,

Band C around the Northern Projection, finding a scatter of artifacts (Figs. 130, 134). Excavation of the tumulus, mainly on the south side, revealed ‘Wall © defining the limits of the ‘Southern ‚Room cleared from 13th-17th September, prompting a final statement ‘There is evidence to indicate that other burials were made against the inner face of the drum? (Fig. 136).! From 17th-21st September the ‘Central Area’ of the tumulus was excavated, represented by a drystone-lined shaft above the main burial chamber with debris infill. At the bottom were three large dressed lintel stones, two of which, broken across their widths, had fallen into the burial chamber, leaving one in situ at the western end, its south-east corner broken off (Fig. 129). On the south side the drystone shaft wall was missing except for a ‘dubious bottom course’; the site of the destroyed northern end of Tomb E.160 is probably represented by ‘Wall ῥ᾽ against the main burial chamber (Figs. 135-136). On 22nd September one of the large cover slabs encircling the tumulus inside the drum was lifted and an exploratory excavation made, revealing the inner tumulus ‘Wall a"? The following day Rowe returned to his previous excavation of a loculus tomb in the Northern Necropolis (Fig. 109). CREPIDOMA

A ‘Bronze coin’ M. 175 was found ‘in debris on top of first step of plinth’on the “δ. side’ and a ‘br. coin M. 176 c. 1 cm diam...

in surface debris above juncture between our tomb E. 161 & lesser

tomb to $^ E. 160. with M. 178 as ‘surface debris above second step. SW sector of plinth towards Tomb 1614. Also a ‘small lamp M.179 (the nozzle of which is heavily blackened), from debris in base. . where a (missing) curved base-slab should have gone’, the outer drum wall of Tomb E. 161 (Assem. XIII; Figs.

132, 317-318 nos. 175-176, 178-179).

NORTHERN PROJECTION

From ‘middle of N. side, surface debris at bottom of ortbostats belonging to the inner drum wall containing the tumulus came ‘2 black-glazed frags’also ‘against third step from top'a ‘frag. black-glazed on both sides.’ During clearance two large slabs A and B were found leaning against the lower step (Fig. 130). 7 © “© "^ "©

Rowe Rowe Rowe Rowe Rowe

Object Register (1955), 2, entered on 7th Sept; Rowe II, 23. II, 5n.1. IL, 5 Fig, 1. Il, 13. Object Register (1955), 1, entered on 3rd-6th Sept; Rowe II, 32.

132

Area A "In debris by bottom step of W. side of “N. Projection" were found a frag. of eggE-tongue moulding, 22cm long M. 193 and 2 frags of black-glazed closed vase.’ At the same level were ‘frags. of pottery, black-glazed & other; in trench near projection, frag. of marble.’ On ‘N. side, level of bottom step, c. 3ft. W. of “N. Projection" were frags of handle & ribbed pottery, all blackglazed, & of grey ware (badly fired), also frag, of black-glazed red ware like the usual Attic’ and a “small frag. of granite’M. 195. There followed ‘many fragments of black-glazed vase(s?) including parts of the handles’ M. 196 and ‘3 minute fragments of glass, slightly curved’ M. 197, ‘discarded’. with clutches of black-glazed ware. M. 198-199 also occurred in an ‘area around’ the Northern Projection. Area B ‘Frag. of Attic closed black-glazed ware with edge of unglazed area (picture-panel), also

tiny frag. of glass’ and a further ‘3 frags of glass, c. 4’ deep’(1.22 m). ‘Many frags. M. 200a-e incl. base of open black-glazed vase with white horizontal line, found by N-W corner of block A.’

Area C ‘Frag. of dressed marble, 13 cm long; Marble frag, c.5cm long, & almost certainly of drapery M. 201. Blocks measured, leaning with top edge against upper part of bottom step ofN Projection. A: 0.45 m. thick, 0.97 m. broad: top surface curved, B: 0.40 m. thick, 0.57 m. broad (max).

Find place of marble stele 20cm below ground level M. 202, ‘LEFT IN SITU’. Approx. dimensions L. 1.70 W. 0.49 Th. 0.46 m. Diagonal ridge’, later described as a “sceptre”. ‘On one edge (the other badly preserved), two small knobs 4.5cm apart; traces of similar knobs at same intervals on the "sceptre”. The fourth side. . found to be blank.’ Found nearby, ‘strip of marble, c. 15 om long M. 205, very probably broken from the shaft of the "sceptre" in relief on the top face of the stele’. The final register entries are a ‘large group buff brown pottery and glass ‘base of plate'M. 204-205 (Assem. XV;

. 320 nos. 193-205).

SourHERN Room

In the register: ‘15 fragments of at least two miniature Doric columns’ M. 207 from a naiskos

(Fig. 254): The ‘base & handle of very large pointed storage amphora, coarse gritty red ware’ were found, also a ‘frag, of black-gl. open lidded vase, with part of handle (lebanis?)'. At a depth of ‘1.90 m, in area opposite central wall’ofE. 160, ‘a large quantity of stone chips, none more than an inch Jong’, which seems to represent a layer of stonemason’s waste. Below, at a depth of ‘2 γε, opposite W. passage’ of E. 160 and ‘from W. passage under masonry of plinth, near floor level: two large frags. of the neck & rim of a large closed vase, Attic black-glazed M. 209 in the ‘sanze area: 3 frags of base of medium-sized vase, highly-polished yellowish ware, painted with red concentric circles on inside of base’, also ‘several small & shapeless fragments of marble'and ‘piece of granite 1” squareM. 208. Fragment of base, with stamped interior, of Attic black-glazed stemless’cup or bolsal found in ‘Sector A, near entrance to E. passage, about 2 metres down. Lamp M. 210, complete except for han-

die, found in rocky debris in NE corner of South Room, about2 ft below bottom of opening (‘niche’) in the inner wall. Iron nail M. 211 just by entry into E. passage'of Tomb E. 160. From ‘niche in N. wall of S. Room: 2 frags incl. handle of small vase (jug?), pinkish ware. Also frag. of Attic open vase’ (Assem. XVI; Fig. 321 nos. 206-211).

"^ Rowe Object Register (1955), 2:3, entered on 7-15th Sept; Rowe IL,5, 13 Fig. ILPL Ib. "© Rowe Object Register (1955), 3, entered on 15th Sept; Rowe II, 5, 2 Figs. III. "^ Rowe Object Register (1955), 3.4, entered on 8-16th Sept; Rowe II, 22.

133 Tumutus SHAFT

132).

The ‘Central Area’ disturbed infill was divided into three alphabetical areas (Figs. 129-130,

Area A: In ‘surface debris of top of mound: frag of Arretine or the like; several frags of marble, incl. a corner and many chips of marble, including one with part of the letter X’ M. 212 and a ‘frag of glass, found in spoil from Central Area.’ There were ‘two slabs lying diagonally in the earth on op of the mound (unshaded area shows portions visible before excavation’ (Figs. 130, 132). Area B: In the fill was a ‘small bronze coin much corroded, but looks Ptolemaic (obv. head of hing?) M. 213, found in Central Area B at about one metre below surface’. At 1.50 m: ‘frag. of carved limestone.. Ht. 15 cm approx., thick & large Attic frag. glazed both sides’ and ‘fragment of RE pottery r. band visible’M.214 and ‘Minute chip of marble, depth c. 1? m’. The Central Area was ‘excavated to depth of about 1? metres. Packed yellowish rubble of sand & broken rock reached in sector C.. elsewhere brown earth still. Area C: ‘Frags of Attic black-glazed open vase(s?) at depth 1? m’ (Assem. XVIIA; Fig. 322

nos. 212-214).

INNER TUMULUS WALL.

"Wall a’ was described: ‘One cover-slab of the round tomb removed from opposite North Pro‘ection: it rested on an inner wall. Between inner & outer walls, clean brown-earth debris : within the inner wall, towards the Central Tomb-Chamber, the same yellow debris of sand & broken rock as eg. in the South Room’ (Figs. 134-136). The register mentions: ‘fragment of lead in crack between N-W roof slab and tbe ledge on which it stood, M. 206°, probably a packing piece (Assem. XV; Fig. 320 no. 206). Maın BURIAL CHAMBER

From the broken corner of the lintel stone in Area C (Figs. 135-136) it was observed that 'debris in tomb falls down from the hole’ in which were ‘frags of pottery visible’, also according to the register ‘2 chips of white marble M. 221° and a ‘frag. of limestone with bead and reel along top M. 223’ which seem to be intrusive material. The tomb was ‘cleared to bottom, which was of unevenly cut natural rock’, and the following artifacts described: ‘many large fragments of unglazed amphora with narrow base, mouth 13.5cm diam., Hellenistic type (2): top debris, S-E cornerM. 216, large fragments ‘of a second similar amphora, of very fragile red clay, found scattered at various depths down to 1m, E end of tomb M. 215, small fragment of thin bronze, shaped like halfan oval: E end, one m. depth, M. 219, unglazed bowl, nearly complete, diam. 13.5 cm., found in mid sector of tomb, c, 1m. deep M. 217, frag. of the rim of a vessel of rather thick glass M. 224, miniature unglazed bydria, complete, c 3 cm bigh, at very bottom of pit M. 222. In addition to above, 5 large fragments of human bone (? from arms) and about half a dozen small pieces were discovered scattered in the debris Μ. 218. In poor condition, but the rest of the body (or bodies?) can hardly have decayed without trace; the conclusion must be that this tomb bad been very seriously disturbed’; in the register: 'discarded 19 Sept'(Assem. XVIIB; Fig. 322 nos. 215-224).””

^^ Rowe Object Register (1955), 4, enteredon 15-19th Sept; Rowe II, 13, 23 Pl. 1c; Thorn (1994), 115 Fig. 10. © Rowe Object Register (1955), 56, entered on 14-20th Sept; Rowe II, 5, 23.

134

11.9.3 Structural Description. Rowe’s ANNEXE Toms E. 161-A, CassEts E. 160

"This tomb formed later an integral part of Tomb E. 161 composite structure (Figs. 133-136). Outer walls Long, low structure L. 9.29 W. 3.91 m of three courses of slightly stepped isodomic work, its top level with Tomb E. 161 crepidoma (Fig. 135). Inner walls L. 8.49 W. 3.07 m,

isodomic construction with free-standing pilasters; the inner and outer walls not bonded, with cavity W. 0.06 m between (Fig. 133). Roof consists of tall lintel stones H. 0.70 L. 1.00 W. 0.44 m, laid across the tomb in pairs on the inner walls. Only thirteen weathered stones remain across Divisions C-D, five original pairs in situ today. The southern end was already robbed when Rowe cleared the tomb, whereas the northern end shows an alteration, with some lintel stones removed and replaced by six flat slabs forming part of the crepidoma and support for Tomb E. 161 outer drum wall (Figs. 133, 135-136), Interior has a long dividing wall W. 0.41 m constructed of a course of six orthostats forming two noticeably low compartments H. 1.09 L. 7.85 W. 0.90 m. Pilasters H.

1.12 W. 0.39 Th. 0.23 m of the inner walls separate each compartment into four divi-

sions of L. 2.60 m. On top of each of the three interior walls is a chamfered sill H. 0.30 projecting 0.20 m into the compartment to support the roof lintels (Fig. 133).

Rowe’s Toms E. 161, CAssELs E. 161

This circular built tomb is a composite construction, incorporating the earlier built rectangular Tomb E. 160 described more fully above (Figs. 134-136). Crepidoma 14.60 m sq. rested on natural rock, and is extensively robbed of its stone. The triple-stepped base with recessive mouldings has a rectangular northern projection (Figs. 130, 132, 134). Outer Drum wall Dia. 13.50 m consisted of two unbonded drum walls Th. 1.60 m, the outer with a base course showing an apophyge with ovolo of bead and reel decoration, above which are two much eroded courses of isodomic work in situ. The number of courses above is unknown, although fragments were found of an upper course of isodomic work with astragal of bead and reel, above which was a cornice with ovolo of lesbian kymation, with ovolo of egg and tongue above, but a separate cymatium course does not survive (Assem. XV; Fig. 320 nos. 195-194)."' Inner Drum wall or revetment is exposed on the eastern side as a course of orthostats H. 0.75 L. 1.28 Th. 0.48+m sitting on a rebated socle forming a 0.12 m gap between the walls

(Figs. 127, 135-136).

Southern Room, named thus by Rowe in his Day Book, subsequently

‘offering-chamber’ or ‘end-chamber’ in the publication.” Retaining ‘Wall c^ of weathered isodomic with the tumulus slope of Tomb E. 161, and the return walls probably butt-jointed against the

work H. 0.30 approx., L. 1.02 W. 0.30 m at the northern end of Tomb E. 160, its top course level outer drum wall, formed an enclosed area L. 3.00-2.97 W. 2.00 m (Figs.

135-136). Main Burial

chamber overall H. 1.52 L. 3.50 W. 2.20 m, its walls constructed of two isodomic courses: ‘The inner faces are covered with plaster painted white above and black below, divided midway by a thin horizontal red band’, the floor of natural rock (Figs. 135-136)."” Tumulus shows a single ring of large limestone paving slab segments H. 0.30 L. 0.95 W. 0.65 m on a surface commencing above

the inner drum wall, thought by Cassels to be from the roof (Figs. 134-135), and in the tumulus ™ RoweIL, 5 Fig. L inset. ™ Rowe Il, 5 Fig. L ™ Rowe Π 5 Fig. .

135

body were fragmentary retaining walls. ‘Wall a’ shows a large segment of roof paving slabs supported on a concentric ringwall inside the body of the tumulus; Professor Stucchi indicates that this was broken." ‘Wall δ᾽ on the southern side of the main burial chamber represents the northern end wall of Tomb E.160. ‘Wall c represents the northern isodomic wall to the ‘Southern Room’ of E. 161 (Figs. 132, 135-136)."”

11.9.4 Observations

Tomb E. 160 was similar in construction to Tomb E. 19 but smaller; the burial compartments were very low, unsuitable for placing stone sarcophagi, suggesting an alternative form of burial practice (Figs. 133, 144, 241). It would seem that originally fifty lintel stones covered Tomb E. 160, placed vertically. Twenty-four of these were removed over Divisions A-B on the northern. half of this tomb when it was radically altered and incorporated into the composite circular Tomb E. 161 fabric (Fig. 137). The rest over Divisions C-D remained in situ and were subject to severe weathering as they were not originally face-bedded. Division A was completely destroyed and incorporated into the tumulus together with the ‘Southern Room’ which had been backfilled with debris, including the two small Doric colonnettes from an isodomic built naiskos, and the entrances partly filled with isodomic blocks (Figs. 135-136, 254). The lintel stones and their supporting chamfered sills of Division B were removed at this point and replaced by slabs level with the crepidoma to support the outer drum wall (Figs. 133-134). This lowered the compartments by 0.30m, forming Rowe’s ‘passages’ which led into the ‘Southern Room’ (Fig. 132). The mason's mark on the isodomic block in crepidoma debris recalls those found recently at Euesperides (11.9.2; Fig. 132)."* The reason why these tombs should be combined is unclear, as there is adequate room for

them to remain as separate entities, there being enough space between the ‘Northern projection’

and the ancient road (Figs. 125, 130). The basis on which Rowe recorded the height of the outer

drum wall of Tomb E. 161 is unknown," but its mouldings are inferior representations of those on circular Tomb N.1 whose comice survives complete (Figs. 96, 250). The tumulus slope, recorded as ‘pretty steep’, is the result both of erosion and the loss of the outer drum wall of the tomb, which accentuates this appearance (Figs. 126-128, 135). The limestone roof paving segments supported on the inner drum wall and Rowe's ‘Wall a’ form a border to the tumulus; no other concentric walls are known, which would have necessary had there been a complete roof. The main burial chamber was similar in height to the adjacent compartments of E. 160 mentioned earlier, and its construction matches the cist in Tomb 5. 81 which was inserted later (Fig. 301). The top step of the ‘Northern Projection’ was probably formed by Slabs A and B which show a curved edge and would meet the drum base above crepidoma level. These slabs had been lifted, perhaps in the mistaken quest for a grave below. The herm shaft M. 202, found toppled nearby, lacks the

square marble base implied by the empolion, and may also have had an inscription. As both were sculpted from imported Pentelic marble, aniconic head M. 185 may belong to the herm shaft (Fig. 137) which may have been deliberately broken to remove a bronze mount (Assem. XIV-XV; Figs. 319-320 nos. 185, 202). The ‘two slabs’ found ‘on top of the mound’ could represent a votive deposit slab (Figs. 130, 135) similar to those in front of Rowe’s Tomb N. 198A sarcophagus (Fig. Stucchi (1988) Fig. 163. 7 Rowe II Fig. 7* Buzaian and Lloyd (1996), 138 Fig. 9. 7" RoweII Fig. I inset.

136

262). The ‘marble chippings’ found by Rowe near these two slabs may have included an unregistered flake of drapery (M. 185 bis) belonging to the aniconic head, discovered loose in 1989 with other Rowe artifacts in Coll. A of the Antiquities Department reserve collections (Fig. 319 no. 185). The tumbled herm shaft could have stood on the tumulus crest, rather than on the Northern Projection, which instead held a three-legged table, recalling the smaller dais by Maioletti's “monolitico', in both cases facing an ancient road (Figs. 135, 137, 258, 295). Other iconographical knobbled staff representations in the necropolis appear on an unprovenanced anonymous block stele from New Shahat and a stele found among the tumble of the fallen Doric facade of loculus Tomb 5.14 which had been turned round and reused for a Roman inscription. Further examples often occur on Attic red figured ware and seem to point to a possible civil function." ‘A structural sequence of events has been isolated: Phase Classical-Hellenistic 1 Construction of TombE. 160 (Figs. 133, 137). 2 Destruction of north end of Tomb E. 160, incorporation into construction of Tomb E. 161 (Figs. 134-137). Rowe’s Toms M.5, Casszts E.19 1.10.1 Historical Background

The tomb, situated on the plateau, ‘i a conspicuous feature of the landscape’. It lies on the northern side of the ancient track, opposite Tomb E. 20 which is thirty paces away, beyond which the Zeus Temple can clearly be seen on the horizon (Fig. 139). These tombs are in an isolated position, and the track is that which continues past Rowe’s Tomb M. 4 (Figs. 138, 149). Derek Buttle's personal photographs record the position of exploratory trenches dug by Rowe (Fig. 144)? "The excavators were surprised to see that there were originally stone sarcophagi in the chambers, one of which they cleared.’ (Fig. 304). The tomb was seen in 1953 by Cassels, who criticised

Rowe's description of its being ‘shaped like an ancient Egyptian mastaba’,™ interpreting the ero-

ded sloping surface as steps and referring to the finding of an unknown ‘krater’.*' Panathenaic amphora fragments, called ‘black figured Greek pottery," were photographed with a site label marked 'M. 121 Tomb M. 5 Chamber Τ᾽, the only indication of the system of recording Rowe used for this tomb (Assem. VIII; Fig. 312)."® Cassels’ field notes contain sketches of items from the sarcophagus: fluted hydria ‘M. 130 black glaze, shiny’ and three lamps 'M. 143 black, flat bottom, Broneer 71 Type IV; M. 142 as above exc. handle not so long; M. 141 Type VII?, browny-black’

glaze (Assem. IX Figs. 313-314).

7 77 ?* 7? ?? © ™

Cassels (1955), 34; Rowe II, 5 Figs. LII Pls.1c, 2a-c. Buttle Arch. Phs. 9/2332. Thorn (1994), 106-107 Fig. 6. Cassels (1955), 15 n.18. Rowe (1952b), 10. Rowe Arch. Phs. 156-159, 161-162, 170. Cassels Arch. Grey Book fol. 9.

137

Π.10.2 Archaeological Work Two small trenches dug at the outer corners of the tomb on the northern side revealed a cuthynteria of dressed isodomic blocks with an offset approx. W. 0.15 m, but on the north-east return the upper course overhangs. The corresponding north-west corner shows a similar offset, but without any overhang. The dressed western face of the euthynteria has vertical rows of secondary dressing of wedge-shaped cuts. Rowe cleared the south-east comer to reveal the remains of the outer wall and removed the lintel stones, proceeding to excavate the southern compartment at this point (Figs. 140-141). Judging from the surviving section at the eastern end, the compartment was filled with terra rossa and lumps of limestone (Fig. 142). In it he discovered: pelike with lid Μ. 116-117; juglet M. 118; and Panathenaic amphora fragments M. 121 which were found in debris over the sarcophagus (Assem. VIII; Figs. 311-312 nos. 116-123). ‘In the debris left outside the robbers’ hole in the sarcophagus lid was part of what appears to have been an Attic hydria body fragment M. 119; a shoulder fragment of which, M. 130, was found later inside the sarcophagus (Assem. IX; Fig. 313 no. 130). The sarcophagus lid was broken across at the eastern end, this part missing and the case full of soil (Figs. 142-143). Inside he discovered: calcite alabastron

M. 127; ribbed hydria fragment M. 130, part of M. 119; ‘Three spiked bosses’ M. 144; ‘Twentythree spiked disks’ M. 145; and ‘Thirty nails’ M. 146. Some ‘pieces of wood fibre still adbere’ to the above-mentioned iron fittings, which Rowe thought represented a cedar coffin (Assem. IX Figs.

313-314 nos. 127-151).

11.103 Structural Description

“This mastaba is nearly forty-eight feet long (14.63 m), about twenty-one feet wide (6.40 m), and nearly eleven feet high (3.35 m). It consists of inner walls forming two parallel compartments, farther divided across their width into four divisions (Fig. 144)."* Euthynteria course of isodomic stretchers H. 0.40 W. 0.56 m forms a raft on which the outer and inner walls of the tomb were constructed (Fig. 144). Outer walls consist of a course of isodomic headers H. 0.37 W. 0.60 m along all four sides, exposed as stretchers at each end of the long sides. Above this are three inward-sloping isodomic courses H. 0.40, 0.44 L. 1.70 W. 0.60 m, capped by a cornice, any moulding eroded (Fig. 138), overhanging by 0.15 m. The courses are extremely weathered, but are identical in appearance to the exposed crepidoma of Tomb E. 174 (Figs. 146, 149). The sloping courses continue round four sides of the tomb, but on the eastern

side the fourth isodomic course shows a weathered but vertical face below the cornice, the only indication that once it was originally stepped as Cassels thought (Fig. 141). Inner walls L. 10.85

W. 3.74 m are not bonded to the outer walls, leaving a gap between of 0.10-0.15 m all round. ‘There are probably five isodomic courses H. 0.48, 0.43 L. 1.08, 1.25 W. 0.55, 0.58 m, the top 0.22 m above the level of the cornice on the outer walls (Fig. 144). Roof consists of lintel stones L. 1.85 I. 0.60, 0.66 Th. 0.44 m laid across the tomb in pairs, twelve shattered rows surviving out of the original nineteen, supported entirely by the inner walls (Fig. 140). Interior has a long central dividing wall W. 0.54 m forming two compartments L. 9.70 W. 1.02, 1.05 and approx. H. 2.25 m. "© Rowe Rowe τα’ Rowe © Rowe

Arch. Phs. 295.297; Rowe II, 27. (1952b), 10; Rowe I, 19-20. Arch. Phs. 298-301; Rowe II, 28 Pl. 27c. Arch. Phs. 64, 66-68, 112-114, 116-119; Buttle Arch. Phs. 11/21 ~ Thesis

Pls.88-89.

138

‘The northern compartment is divided 2.45m from the western end by a vertical slot H. 0.62 W. 0.28 D. 0.10 m cut under a roof lintel stone. This held in 1952 a divider stone which has since disappeared, recorded by Rowe (Fig. 142). Within this division is a stone sarcophagus with lowpitched lid, its apex 1.17 m below the soffit of the roof lintel stone (Fig. 304). 11.10.4 Observations

This tomb is reminiscent of Tomb E. 160 in its construction of inner and outer walls with a gap between, but differs initially in its height and the shape of the lintel stones (Figs. 133, 144, 241). The southern compartment’s vertical slot, the site of the original divider stone which existed in 1952, below which one could see in 1989 only terra rossa and lumps of limestone, overlooked the broken lid of the sarcophagus which contained iron bosses and a quantity of nails (Assem. IX;

Fig. 314 nos. 144-146). These indicate furniture to a collapsed wooden door, which further exca-

vation at this point would establish, if the remainder were found in situ (Figs. 144, 285). The sarcophagus must have been lowered into the division as the isodomic work at the ends of the tomb was bonded rather than butt-jointed (Figs. 144, 251, 304). Rowe’s Toms M. 4, CAssELs E. 174

IL11.1 Historical Background

"This tomb is situated on the western slope at the head of Wadi bu Milio, south of the ancient track running across the wadi head and passing in front of Rowe's Tomb M.5 (Fig. 149). From it there is a commanding view of the lower plain of the Jebel with the Mediterranean Sea beyond. I saw the tomb in 1991 and found the crepidoma under makeup for the modern road to New Shahat on the line of the ancient track, and a concrete boundary fence cutting across it. Buttle doubted the existence of a mound, stating in his notes: ‘the slenderness of the single wall (ring wall) would not appear adequate to retain’ soil. Cassels mentioned that there was "No sign of a roof’. Cists found in the tomb interior were only described by Rowe as: ‘there were more cists than one’. In 1953 Cassels noted a ‘grave at centre (but did Rowe dig it?)’, the latter wrongly centralized when published by Rowe (Figs. 148-149). Stucchi reconstructed the tomb, giving the first presentation of its primary function as a burial plot. 1.11.2 Archaeological Work

‘The eastern corner of the crepidoma was cleared of hillwash which had accumulated against the outer drum wall of the tomb, revealing the edge of the upper step, and the northern corner was cleared below the exposed face of weathered steps and euthynteria (Figs. 145-147, 149), following which Cists 1-2 were excavated (Fig. 301). The burial artifacts’ locations were not pre"® "© ™ 75? 7?

Rowe Arch. Phs. 65, 115; Buttle Arch. Phs. 11/23-24 ThesisPl. 90. Cassels Arch. Blue Book fol. 41 Ph. 170. Rowe (1952a), 4; IFig. I. Cassels Arch. Blue Book fol. 41. Stucchi (1988), 354-355 Figs. 182-183 ‘Tomb S. 107 sic.

139

cise, described as: ‘from various places inside the circle'' ‘Graeco-Libyan’ ware M. 103-107, possibly referring to a conical vessel showing exterior applied disks (II.12.4); Rhodian amphora (M. 110); pelike M. 114; and a lamp M. 115 which Cassels identified as Broneer ‘Type VII, buff:2would-be black’, similar to his Cat. 136 (Assem.VII; Fig. 310 nos.103-114)" IL113 Structural Description

Crepidoma of carefully dressed isodomic blocks, H. 0.34 m, averaging L. 1.25 W. 0.56 m. The north-western face displays four exposed courses of isodomic work, the lowest being the euthynteria of headers of much thicker blocks. These courses slope inwards as they rise, and have a rusticated appearance (Figs. 145-146, 149). The square crepidoma is terraced into the wadi slope,

its upper course forming a paved surface ‘not extending inside the circle’ of the tomb." Outer Drum wall H. 0.90 Dia. 16.50 m defining this area, supported by paving, has largely disappeared, but on the southern side can be seen plinth blocks H. 0.28 L. 1.20 approx, Th. 0.60 m with single recessive moulding and ovolo with astragal above, supporting a course of orthostats H. 0.62 L. L18-121 Th. 035 m with single recessive moulding as before, their backs roughly dressed (Figs. 145-147). Eleven survive in situ, their weathered tops protruding above ground level before excavation, one showing according to Rowe ‘a small inser (VII.7.3). Interior contains a covering of terra rossa with, Rowe claimed, two cists cut into it (Fig. 149). Cist 1 is untraced but was shown as having the same size and construction as Cist 2 below. Cist 2 slab built, the top edges very weathered, projecting slightly above the ground (Figs. 148, 301). IL11.4 Observations

The inward-sloping face of the crepidoma probably represents a triple-stepped base with euthynteria, which have weathered into their present shape, a feature also noticed on Rowe's Tomb M. 5 (Figs. 138, 144, 146). The outer drum wall could have stood approx. H. 1.20 m with a coping (Fig. 149). The recessive moulding on the plinth implies that this course is unfinished, with the moulding above intended for a final cutting of the ovolo and astragal, with egg and tongue and bead and reel, as demonstrated on the partially finished mouldings on the Belevi Mausoleum in Lydia.'” The tomb circumference 51.83 m would mean that 48 blocks were used at Rowe's given length of 1.08 m. One suspects that the known burial artifacts may have come from Cist 2, based on the evidence of the contemporary photographic record (Fig. 148). Their uniformly crushed condition may represent an assemblage, noticeably lacking the expected red figure or blackglazed wares (Assem. VII; Fig. 310). The enormous circumference and lightness of construction of the outer drum wall, also the lack of a mound, imply that it is, in fact, a large enclosed burial plot (Figs. 145, 250), but the undressed appearance of the interior of the outer drum wall implies the possible intention of building an inner revetment wall of orthostats for a tumulus to be raised later, bordered by a ring of roof paving slabs based on Tomb E. 161 as a comparison (Figs. 127, 134-135, 149).

'™ 7? ?* 77. 7? ™

Rowe Arch. Phs. 266, 291.294, Rowel, 7.8. Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 2; Rowe II, 27 PL 13b. Cassels Arch. Grey Book fol. 8. Rowe Arch. Phs. 56-63,96-101, 105-111; Rowe I, 7-8. Fedak (1990), 81 Fig. 102.

140 SOUTHERN NECROPOLIS Rowe's Tomas M. 9-13; Casseus S. 80-85

1.12.1 Historical Background

On flat terrain bordering the southern, outer arc of an ancient track stand ‘five examples of round tombs, arranged in the form of a crescent’ (Fig, 150).*® These, Rowe's Tombs M. 9-13, were all measured but only Rowe’s Tomb M. 9 at the eastern end was excavated: ‘a circle of roughly hewn spaced stones standing to a height of about three and a half feet (1.07). Between the spaces are smaller blocks, All the stones rest upon a circular base of natural rock. In the centre is a cist of stone slabs for the burial. From one tomb came an elegant drinking-cup (kylix) of the sixth or early fifth century B.C. After the burial was made the circle was filled with earth in the shape of a shallow cone." Cassels saw these tombs a year later in 1953, his field notes giving: Tomb 8.80 ‘Circle of upright stones. only crater where Rlowe] dug in middle, Rowe'sM. 9° (Figs. 151-152). In the adjoining circular Tomb 8. 81 he described: ‘Exceptionally wellmade masonry burial cist approx centre. Rowe's M. 10° 2% Cassels gave the dimensions of the four tombs M. 10-13, Rowe being the primary source of the latter information, and also described the burial in Tomb 8.81 as a ‘robbed cist in centre’ (Figs. 154, 301)2° Cassels photographed Tomb S. 84 and additionally recorded Tomb S. 85 to complete the group (Fig. 150). In March 1956 Tomlinson came across the ruins of another tomb beside Tomb S. 80 described as ‘rectangular annex at S end (possibly a separate tomb).” "This was excavated in 1963 by Professor Beschi, revealing the rectangular built Tomb S. 80 bis to the east of Rowe’s Tomb M. 9, between which in 1959 a half-figure had previously been found (Figs. 157, 254)” These tombs are now on Ali Mahmoudi Mohamed's land, also forming his boundary; the ancient track is ploughed out, and adjacent is the new slip road under construction (Fig. 207).

11.12.2 Archaeological Work

Beschi described Tomb 8. 80 as having two trial trenches, one outside against the ringwall on the south side in order to ascertain its height and foundations, and the other inside, almost in the centre; however, this was abandoned before reaching bedrock as no expected cist grave was found. Four artifacts were registered,” kylix M.153 being found in ‘disturbed upper remains’ with ‘parts of an Old Persian po? M. 155°” also a marble fluted column fragment M. 152 (Assem.X; Fig. 315 nos. 152-155). Further 1963 excavation revealed a layer of red soil Th. 0.250 m; underneath, slightly off-centre to the west, a circular patch approx. Dia. 1.00 Th. 0.050 m of charcoal ash, calcined bones and lumps of fired clay, interpreted as a ‘ustrinum’, resting on a layer Th ™ ® ® = ® 3% ? ?*

Rowe, 67. Rowe (19524), 4. Rowe Arch. Phs. 1.5, 11-15; Cassels Arch. Yellow Book fol.9. Fairman Arch. Rowe's 1955 Day Book, list; Cassels Arch. Brown Book fol 13. Cassels Arch, Phs. 205, 244-245; Cassels (1959), 14 Pl. 7a Tomlinson Arch. fol. 90; Beschi (1972), 150-151 Fig. 10; 236-7 Fig. 72 n0.29. Rowe Arch. Phs. 302-303, 307; Fairman Arch, Rowe's 1955 Day Book fol. 5; Rowe II, 28, Rowel7. Rowe If, 22 n.1

141 0.250 m of chalky soil which covered the limestone bedrock.” The adjoining Tomb S. 81 had a ‘cist in centre (robbed)', according to Cassels, the only indication that it might have been excavated by Rowe (Figs. 153, 301).2”

11.12.3 Structural Description

S. 80 bis Rectangular built tomb in ruins, The triple-stepped base remains with a weathered with a central dividing wall and chamfered sills to support the now missing sepatator slabs (Fig 1572" S. 80, Rowe’s M.9 Rowe described roughly-hewn upright blocks approx. H. 1.15 L. 0.44 W. 0.62 m placed in a circle Dia. 9.32 m2” Beschi described the foundation course as a row of accurately cut blocks H. 0.57 L. 0.80 m forming a circle Dia. 9.41 m on a socle with an outer offset W. 0.13 m. On this the upright blocks were placed, eighteen of the original twenty-four surviving, at intervals of 0.80 m. Author's 1994 addition: spaces between the upright blocks were originally infilled with pieces of stone of various sizes. The tomb interior is a raised flat surface 0.40 m below the top of the upright blocks, composed of a layer of large stone chippings covering a layer isodomic course above, exposed H. 0.95 L. 7.01 W. 4.25 m. The interior has two compartments

of terra rossa ca. 0.75 m above ground surface (Figs. 151-152, 157).

S. 81, Rowe's M. 10 Twenty upright blocks surviving, exposed H. 0.63 L. 0.43 W. 0.60 forming a circle Dia, 7.90 m, placed at intervals 0,65 m. The interior shows a slightly raised flat chippings, below which, in the centre, is an isodomic-built cist chamber 035 m surface of stone below the top of the upright blocks, later inserted into the terra rossa (Figs. 153-154, 301). Southeast of this tomb is a group of isodomic blocks H. 0.38 L. 130 W. 0.62 m laid in the form of a crude cist H. 0.38 L. 3.20 W. 1.7m resting on a stone platform, exposed W. 0.55 m. Continuing

from this is a line of boundary stones L.

0.30 W. 0.60 m at intervals of 1.10 m running in the

direction of Tomb S. 80. S. 82, Rowe's M. 11 Fourteen upright blocks surviving out of sixteen, exposed H. 035 L. 1.10 W. 0.52 m forming a continuous circle Dia. 5.32 m. The interior has terra rossa, not stone chippings. North-west of this tomb, the remains of a ringwall to a circular tomb survive as two courses of isodomic work, the upper course H. 0.56 L. 1.00 W. 0.62 m showing pryholes and a lower offset of 0.14m. At right-angles to this are boundary stones L. 0.42 W. 0.48 m at intervals of 082m. S. 83, Rowe's M. 12 Nineteen upright blocks surviving, exposed H. 0.76 L. 044 W. 0.65 m forming a circle Dia. 7.35 m, placed at intervals of 0.70 m. The interior has layer of stone chippings (Fig. 155).

S. 84, Rowe's M. 13 Fourteen upright blocks surviving out of fifteen, exposed H. 0.50 L. 0.58 W. 0.58 m forming a circle Dia. 5.72 m, placed at intervals of 0.50 m. The interior has a layer of stone chippings 0.15 m below the top of the upright blocks (Fig. 156). S. 85 Cassels described this as a circular tomb with ‘not much left. This is the biggest one,

?^ 2 νι #2

Tomlinson Arch. Ph. 21/21; Beschi (1972), 152-153 Figs. 11-13 Fairman Arch. Rowe's 1955 Day Book, lst; Rowe I, 7 Fig. I Beschi (1972), 153-156 Figs. 12-14. Rowe I, 6-7 Fig.

142

with something pretty massive in the centre’ referring to it as ‘(flat slab type ofsarco?)'? There is no indication of the existence of a built crepidoma, but a ringwall consisting of isodomic blocks H. 0.58 L. 1.10 W. 0.50 m forms a circle Dia.16.0 m approx., and a large weathered slab in the middle L. 2.40 W. 0.60 m represents the feature which Cassels saw. 11.12.4 Observations

There is no published description or photographic record of any cist or grave in Tomb S. 80, but in Rowe's 1955 Day Book he noted that this tomb was ‘excavated’ and the adjoining Tomb 8. 81 ‘planned’, although he made no mention of the cist noted by Cassels (Figs. 154, 301). The mound shown by Rowe over the cist grave in Tomb $.80 did not exist before excavation (Figs. 151-152), and the other tombs in this group are similar (Figs. 150, 153-156)" The pit in Tomb 8.80 noticed by Cassels as a ‘crater’ in 1953 seems unusual, as it would have been uncharacteristic of Rowe not to have backfilled his trench, and it was probably an agreement in his contract. The interior of the isodomic-built cist in Tomb 8.81 has been partly backfilled with a deep layer of stones. This was typical of Rowe’s archaeological techniques, and such a layer was also noticed in Tomb E.19 covering the sarcophagus (Fig. 144). Taking this latter evidence, it seems likely that Rowe excavated Tomb S. 81, and the modern pit in Tomb S. 80 could either be a dugout from the Second World War, making it pointless to conduct an excavation there, or the result of tombrobbing after his departure. The virtually complete kylix M. 153 appears to have been crushed, perhaps indicating a homogeneous layer removed by Rowe with no known associated artifacts. "This type of vessel in contrast was found in a inhumation burial at Corinth, associated with a skyphos cup, a type known from Rowe's rock-cut Grave N. 83-D (Assem. XXVII-C; Fig. 333 no. 369)" the implication being that cist burials and rock-cut graves can be contemporary in Cyrene. The context of the ‘Old Persian pot’, renamed ‘Old Libyan pottery'is equally uncertain” but refers to a rim fragment of a conical vessel with relief decoration, of which there are other examples elsewhere in the necropolis (Assem. LII, LXXII; Figs. 342, 369 nos. 525, 826)” The size of Tomb 5.85 is identical to E. 174, with the same function of a burial plot, but differs by not showing a built crepidoma, and the close proximity to Tomb S. 84, only 0.50 m away, would appear to preclude this (Figs.

149, 150, 250).

A structural sequence of events has been isolated:

Phase Archaic 1 Construction of annular Tombs 8. 80-81,S. 83-84 for cremations (Figs. 150, 247). Classical-Hellenistic 2 Later insertion of isodomic-built cist chamber in Tomb S. 81 (Figs. 221, 249). 3 Construction of Tomb S. 82 (Fig. 150). 4 Construction of Tomb 8. 85 (Fig. 150). 5 Construction of temple Tomb S. 80 bis (Fig. 157). #9 Cassels Arch. Yellow Book fol. 9; Cassels (1955), 34 PI. 1. ?* Buttle Arch. Ph. 11/33; Thorn (1994), 106 Pls.35. 5 Ure (1927), 28 Pl. XI no. IVc; Leune (1915), 197-198PL. XL Rowe I, 7; Rowe IT, 28. Ὁ HL IV. 162-167, 200-205.

143 Rowe’s TomsM. 14, Cassis S. 77 11.13.1 Historical Background

Slightly south-east of Rowe’s Tombs M. 9-13 bordering the eastern side of the sunken ancient road from Balagrae leading into Cyrene (Fig. 158)."* Because of its position with a commanding view it was probably used c. 1940-42 by the military, as ‘Among the objects of antiquity were discovered two intrusive elements in the shape of Italian hand-grenades’, probably when Tomb S. 77 CuBr. 1 was opened by Rowe (Figs. 159-161): In a tomb in this vicinity part of a British commando force took shelter, after an attempted raid on what was thought to be Rommel’s Headquarters at Beida on 17th November 1941 and blowing up the communications pylon by the Cyrene crossroads, now the site of the Friday Market by Wadi Sneidi ? The earliest known photograph shows vegetation around the tomb." It was visited in 1953 by Cassels, who made notes and sketches of the orthostat-built cist chambers and block sarcophagi configurations,” which Rowe published with a tumulus and Stucchi subsequently republished as a reconstruction without one.” The slabs which covered Tomb S. 77 Chir. 1 and 2 have been dislodged recently by tomb-robbers, revealing for the first time the latter's differing construction by partially using isodomic work (Figs. 162, 301).

11.13.2 Archaeological Work Cur. 1 was excavated, a reference being made by Rowe to ‘bodies laid at full length’, but no mention of burial artifacts other than ‘black-glazed fragments’ (Assem. XI; Fig. 315 no. 156).

Chor. 2 does not seem to have been excavated, probably due to its similarity to the above. Sarcos. 3-5 lid rims showed holes from robbing and because of this were left unexcavated. 1.13.5 Structural Description

Enclosure square L. 14.00 W. 15.75 m, the wall constructed of rough quarry-cut blocks H. 0.70 L. 1.20 W. 0.58 m laid on their sides on the natural surface of terra rossa in a continuous line

around three sides, open to the north-west. The northern and western corners were cut from natural rock to form a continuation of the enclosure wall. On the north-eastern wall cut into this natural rock is a square socket as if for a herm, and at the eastern comer is a rebate cut to receive the first isodomic block on the south-eastern side. In the interior a deep trench is quarried L. 12.66, (13.25) W. 1.45 D. 1.38m set back from the ancient road by 1.90m, which defines the enclosure and square podium of the circular built tomb. There are two access points on the northwestern side, overlooking the ancient road passing by the tomb, where stone has been removed, one of which seems to indicate later quarrying (Figs. 160, 163). 2 2 29 = 2 ® ?* =

Rowe Arch. Phs. 10, 23, 78; Cassels (1955), 34 Pl. Rowe (19524),4. Keyes (1956), 241.242. Jowett Arch. Notebook fol. 52 Ph. F.31 Album 363 dated 1948. Cassels (1955), 10, 15. Rowe Arch. Phs. 72-76; Stucchi (1988), 355 Figs. 184-185. Rowe If, 28. Stucchi (1988) Fig. 185a.

144

Square podium L. 9.56 W. (9.56) m ‘near two metres high, made partly of rock and partly of masonry2* The north-western side shows the natural surface with a horizontal geological fault 0.60 m below, and the western corner had to be supplemented with a single course of rough quarry-cut blocks H. 0.56 L. 1.27 W. 041 m spliced in to define the south-western side of the podium. Drum wall, much weathered, described by Rowe as being H. 1.55, maximum Dia. 8.75 m; Cassels states it was ‘in parts 4 courses high’ On the south-eastern half of the drum wall is a euthynteria course H. 0.30 L. 0.40 W.- offset by 0.08m which fills a void in the natural rock-cut surface. The first lower course is of headers H. 0.45 L. 0.62 W. 0.58 m, above which is a course of stretchers H. 0.30 L. 1.15 W. 0.40 m, surmounted by another course of stretchers H. 0.28 m again offset, forming a socle, which consists of a continuous ring of possibly thirty-two isodomic blocks. The top surface shows an anathyrosis with diagonal tooling done with a mason's pin, and a central pryhole. Originally on top of these was a course of orthostats H. 0.68 L. 1.30 Th. 0.30 m, since dislodged from the wall by tomb-robbers (Fig. 161). Interior contains a cluster of five burials in a matrix of terra rossa, slightly higher than the surrounding terrain (Fig. 159). Some isodomic work in the tomb’s drum wall has been cut back roughly to insert the south-western corner of Rowe's orthostat-built Cupr, 1. To the east of this is Rowe's central isodomic-built CHBR. 2, the latter surrounded by three block Sarcophagi 3-5, described as follows.

Cups. 1 The lid is formed of four cover slabs laid across the cist chamber (Fig. 162). The first at the eastern end has been moved and lies by the side, the following two are in situ, and the fourth partly drawn back. The cist chamber is constructed of six orthostats in the upper level, the interior described by Cassels as ‘two compartments deep; big slabs’,** the lower level cut into the natural rock of the podium. Only a small portion of the case projects above the surface, 0.46m above the top of the moulding course (Figs. 163, 301).””

Cuni. 2 The same lid construction as CHpR. 1 with the eastern block parted from the others (Fig, 162), The fourth block, also in situ, is broken at the southern end. The interior has two ashlar-built courses, the lower level being rock-cut as before but filled with debris. The rim of the ‘case is 0.36 m above the top of the moulding course and level with the rims of the adjacent three Sarcophagi3-5 (Figs. 163, 301)

Sarcos. 3-5 Lids with acroteria but no central plinths, the surface heavily pitted through centuries of weathering, The level of the cases is the same as CHR. 2 (Figs. 163, 301). 1.13.4 Observations

This tomb differs by not having a square triple-stepped crepidoma, and the square podium showing the natural rock-cut surface is a poor substitute, especially on the south-eastern half of the tomb, where it is likely that quarried blocks were used to create the square. The materials for this tomb probably originated from the surrounding deep trench (Fig. 163), which was quarried after the last imported block sarcophagus was placed in position in an established group, subsequently enclosed by the orthostat-built drum wall (Fig. 249). The evidence for this is shown by Cur, 1 where its corner encroaches into a notch which has been cut for it on the inside of the drum wall, a miscalculation of the radius making a constructional adjustment necessary. The lack > 77. 2 2

Rowe, Cassels Cassels Stuechi

89. Arch. Grey Book fols. 3.4. Arch. Grey Book fols, 3-4 (1988) Fig. 185b.

145

of a central plinth on the sarcophagi may suggest that any intended stelai could have been placed on the drum wall cornice (Figs. 256-257). There is no evidence that the tomb had a mound as the sarcophagi lids are weathered, suggesting that the interior was just an enclosed circular burial

plot. The construction matches that of Tomb N. 119 and the Friday Market tomb of New Shahat (Fig. 249).

146 LIST OF FIGURES CHAPTERII — Rowe's Necropolis Studies Fig. 47 The extent of Rowe's explorationsin the necropoleis.

Northern Necropolis ,- 48 Location plan: sondage, stele and pedestal monuments N. 380-383, 49 Intended area of excavation, Wadi bu Turchia, 1952 50 Rowe's Sondage Trench 1, archaic ‘stele’ exposed, 1952 51 Stcle Monument Tombs N. 381, Monuments 1-2, 1948 52 Stele Monument Tomb N. 382, 1948 53 Stele Monument TombsN. 383, Monuments 1-8, 1952 54 Rowe's M. 1 Tomb N. 383 Monuments 4 and 9 excavated, 1952 Fig. 55 Maioleti's reassembled stele monuments and stepped bases . 56 Maiolett’s reassembled pedestal monuments and stepped bases i. 57 Location plan: Tomb of the Good Shepherd complex, N. 241 ; 58 Rowe'sΜ. 7 Tomb of the Good Shepherd N. 241, quarry forecourt, 1952 59 Rowe's M. 7 Tomb of the Good Shepherd N. 241, cubiculum interior i. 60 Plan and interior elevations of the Tomb of the Good Shepherd,N. 241 61. Location plan: Tomb N. 13 complex, including inserted Roman tomb 62 Rowe's M. 16 Tomb N. 13, cleared before excavation, 1952 65 Rowe's M. 16 Tomb N. 13 forecourt with Loculi 1 and 2, 1952 64 Plan and elevation of Rowe's excavated and surveyed loculi, Tombs N. 13-N. 12 and N. 10 65 TombN. 10 facade 66 Structural sequence of development, Tombs N. 13-10 i. 67 Location plan: range of Cyrene's archaic chamber Tombs N. 9-N. 2 68 Tombs N. 7-N. 9 - Smith and Porcher, 1861 69 Tombs N. ΤΙΝ. 9 -- Weld-Blundell, 1894 i. 70 Tombs N. 6-N. 9- Tassoni clearance, ¢.1914 ig. 71 Tombs N.5-N. 6 portico facades 72 Tombs N. 3.N. 4 portico facades 73 Tomb N. 2 portico facade 74 Plan and elevation, Archaic Doric chamber Tomb N. 9 and Ionic chamber Tomb N. 8 75 Plan and elevation, Archaic Doric chamber Tombs N. 7-N. 5 76 Plan and elevation, Aeolic chamber Tombs N. 4-N. 2 ΤΊ Structural sequence of development, Tombs N. 5 and N. 7; N. 6 and N. 9 78 Structural sequence of development, Tombs N. 2-N. 5 . 79 Structural sequence of development, Tombs N. 8, N. 10 and N. 401 80 Structural sequence of development, Tomb N. 5 81 Location plan: TombN. 1 complex at head of Wadi Haleg Shaloof 82 Rowe'sM. 15 Tomb N. 1, cleared, 1925 83 Rowe'sM. 15 Tomb N. 1, cleared, 1925 84 Rowe'sM. 15 Tomb N. 1 showing shaft and Klinai, 1925 i. 85 TombN. 1 subterranean chamber — calcite burial artifacts, 1925 i. 86 TombN. 1 subterranean chamber - black-glazed burial artifacts, 1925 87 Tomb N. 1 bis 1 under excavation, 1926 88 Tomb N. 1 bis 2 - discovery of aniconic half-igure, 1926 89 Tomb N. 1bis 1 - metallic burial artifacts, 1926 90 Tomb N. 1 bis 1 — miscellany of burial artifacts, 1926 91 Tomb N. 401 with restored built facade, 1938 92 TombN. 401 without built fagade, 1952 93 Tomb N. 34, rock-cut facade 94 Tomb N. 34, rock-cut balustrade screen, unfinished lid behind 95 Italian survey, Tomb N. 1 roof and TombN. 1 bis 1; naiskos and half-figure, N. 1 bis 2 96 Plan and elevation- subterranean chamber shaft, Tomb N. 1; earlier temenos wall

Figs. 47-163 (1.1.0) au)

112)

12) {113} (1.13)

(1.12)

(113) (113)

(1.13)

2.) (123) (12.1; 1123) 123) (13.1) (133) (13.3) {133} (133) (L4) 4) 614.) UA) (LG) (143) (143) {143} (143) {143} (43) (44) (44) Li) (1.44) 15.1) (1523) (11525) 01523) 152) 0152) (152) (152) 0152) 0152) (153) (153) {153} (153) (15.1.2) (1153)

Fig. 97 Fig. 98 Fig. 99 Fig. 100 Fig. 101 Fig. 102 ig. 103 Fig. 104 Fig. 105 Fig. 106 Fig. 107 Fig. 108 Fig, 109 Fig. 110 Fig. 111 . 112 113 Fig. 114 Fig. 115 Fig. 116 Fig. 117 Fig. 118 Fig. 119 Fig. 120 Fig. 121 Fig. 122 Fig, 123 Fig, 124

Relationship of subterranean chamber with Tomb N. 1 bis 1 Earlier temenos wall showing relationship with Tomb N. 1 Elevations and plan of truncated Tomb N. 1 bis 1 and relationship with temenos wall Panelled orthostat-built burial precinct Tomb N. 1 bis 2 Restored facade (1938) and plan of Tomb N. 401; views of burial precinct overN. 34 Structural sequence of development, Tombs N. 1 and N. 1 bis 1-2 Structural sequence of development around Tomb N. 1 — carlier and later phases Location plan: eastern slope of Wadi Haleg Shaloof, Tomb N. 57 Tomb N. 57, unexcavated, with the western slope of Wadi Haleg Shaloof beyond, 1937 Shrine Tomb N. 57 constructed above lost built facade of N. 58, adjoining N. 59 Views and sections of panelled orthostat-built shrine Tomb N. 57 Structural sequence of development, Tombs N. 57-N. 58 Location plan: western slope of El Mawy land, Tombs N. 197-N. 198 Rowe's M. 3 Tomb N. 197 facade partly cleared, 1952 Rowe'sM. 3 Tomb N. 197 loculi partly excavated, 1952 Rowe's M. 3 Tomb N. 197 forecourt loculus sarcophagus, 1955 Rowe's Tomb N. 198A forecourt debris, 1955 Rowe's Tomb N. 198A sarcophagus, 1955 Tomb N. 198 buried in hillwash Tomb N. 197 facade loculus excavated by Rowe; N. 198 facade loculus surveyed by Rowe Rowe's Day Book: artifact identification, N. 197-198 forecourt; suggested sequence of development of tombs Location plan: eastern slope of El Mawy land, showing relationship of Tombs N. 201-N. 202 Rowe's M. 6 shrine Tomb N. 201 covered by hillwash before excavation, 1952 Rowe's M. 2 and M. 6, temple Tomb N. 202 and shrine Tomb N. 201, general view Rowe's M. 2 temple Tomb N. 202 buried in hillwash, 1952 Rowe's M. 2 temple Tomb N. 202 unburied side, 1952 Views and sections of panelled orthostat-built shrine Tomb N. 201 Views and sections of plain orthostat-built temple Tomb N. 202; roof slab configuration

Eastern Fig, 125 Fig. 126 Fig. 127 Fig. 128 Fig. 129 Fig. 130 Fig. 131 132 Fig. 133. Fig. 134 Fig. 135 Fig. 136 Fig. 137 Fig. 138 Fig. 139 Fig. 140 Fig. 141 Fig. 142 Fig. 143 Fig. 144 Fig. 145 Fig. 146 Fig, 147 Fig. 148 Fig. 149

Necropolis Location plan: Abderrahim Mohammed Larbid land, Tombs E.160-161 Rowe's Tomb E.161A Tomb E.160 after excavation, 1955 Tomb E.161 before excavation, 1952 Tomb E.161 tumulus under excavation, 1955 Tomb E.161 clearing of burial chamber, 1955 Rowe's Day Book: plan, E.160-E.161;'Northern Projection’, E.161; tumulus detail Rowe's Day Book: annotated stepped ‘annexe’ Tomb E.160 Rowe's Day Book: structural elements and ‘Southern Room’, Tomb E.161 Views and sections of the ‘annexe’, Tomb E.160 View from above of Tomb E.161 View of the external sides and view of sections of Tomb E.161 Cutaway view from above of Tomb E.161 Suggested sequence of development, Tombs E.160-161 and marble aniconic female herm Rowe's M. 5 mastaba Tomb F.19 general view from north, 1952 Rowe's M. 5 mastaba Tomb E.19 south side with temple Tomb E.20 beyond, 1952 Rowe's M. 5 mastaba Tomb E.19 lintel stones, 1952 Rowe's M. 5 mastaba Tomb E.19 excavated south-western corner, 1952 Rowe's M. 5 mastaba Tomb E.19 block sarcophagus, eastern end, 1952 Rowe'sM. 5 mastaba Tomb E.19 block sarcophagus, western end, 1952 Vicus and sections of Rowe's mastaba Tomb E.19 Rowe's M. 4 Tomb E.174 general view looking east, 1952 Rowe's M. 4 Tomb E.174 crepidoma looking north-east, 1952 Rowe's M. 4 Tomb F.174 study of ring wall on crepidoma, 1952 Rowe's M. 4 Tomb E.174 interior, study of cist 2 looking south-east, 1952 Rowe's Tomb E.174: plan and reconstructed view, section and possible tumulus, including a comparison with Tomb E.161

147 (153) (153) (153) (153) 155) (1.5.4) a4 (6.1) (1.63) {163} (163) 164) L7.) 173) 173) (173) (172) (173) (173) (73) (172,4) 8.1) (83) {183} {183} {183} {183} (1834) r1) 191) (9.1) (19. 19) 19.12) (192) (192) (193) (193) (193) (195) 194) (11.103) (1.103) 1103) (11023) (01102) 1102) (11.103) (113) (1113) (1113) (1113) OLILL 34)

148

Southern Fig. 150 Fig. 151 Fig. 152 Fig. 153 Fig. 154 Fig. 155 Fig. 156 Fig. 157 Fig. 158 Fig. 159 Fig. 160 Fig. 161 Fig. 162 Fig. 165

Necropolis Location plan: Ali Mahmoudy Mohammed land, Tombs S. 80:8. 85 Rowe's M. 9 Tomb S. 80 before excavation, 1952 Rowe's M. 9 Tomb S. 80 after excavation, 1952 Rowe's M. 10 Tomb S. 81 general view looking west, 1952 Rowe'sM. 10 Tomb S. 81, excavated cist looking east Rowe'sM. 12 Tomb S. 83 before excavation looking north-west; Tomb S. 84 behind, 1952 Rowe'sM. 13 Tomb S. 84 before excavation showing track alongside, 1952 View and plan of Rowe's and Beschi’s Tombs S. 80, S. 80 bis; marble half figure. Location plan: bordering the ancient road to Balagrae, Tomb S. 77 Rowe's M. 14 Tomb S. 77 before excavation, general view looking north, 1952 Rowe's M. 14 Tomb S. 77 before excavation, ancient road in foreground, 1952 Rowe's M. 14 Tomb S. 77 before excavation, looking west, 1952 Rowe's M. 14 Tomb S. 77 before excavation, Cha 2 and 1, 1952 External view and sections of built circular burial plot, Tomb S. 77

(a2) 1.12.15) (1213) 01123) 01123) (1123) (1123) (1123) Grip (1153) (1133) (11.133) (01.133) L133)

149

Note alin nerpeli ei dif, being eared by Canes aer 1955, τὴς V Case i9 Fi)

Fic. 47 ~The extent of Rowe's explorations in the necropoleis {Π.1.1}.

Men. Jee Fic. 48 -Location plan: sondage, stele and pedestal monuments N. 380-383 (11.1.2). 1a. Italian building;2a. Assemblage LIII; 32. Assemblage IV; 4a. Road extension ca. 1938; 5a. Maioletti A.

150

Fic, 50 -Rowe's Sondage Trench 1, archaic ‘stele’ exposed, 1952 (I1).

151

Fic. 51 -- Stele Monument Tombs N. 381, Monuments 1.2, 1948 (L1).

152

Fic. 52 - Stele Monument Tomb N. 382, 1948 (11.1.3).

153

Fic. 54 Rowe's M. 1 Tomb N. 383 Monuments 4 and 9 excavated, 1952 (11.1.3).

154

Ad

Fs

Rowe'sTombM.18TombN.380 o

lesb-] ^ N.381 Monument 1

Lac] N. 381 Monument 2

Im

WR AI ao

d i Δ

ΓΝ 9h05] Info: Abdulkader el Muzeiny

Fic. 55 - Maiolett’s reassembled stele monuments and stepped bases {1.3}. 1. Mortice; 2. Tenon; 3. Maioletti D; 4. Maioletti E.

ERES)

155

M IOTER

NA

fr

ART: QUT SURED

i DN

3,MonumentETÀ 10 Rowe's Tomb M. 17 ‘Tomb Ν. 383 Mon.3

Monument 5

Κονεῖς Tomb M. 1 Tomb N. 383 Mon. 4

‘Monument 7

Fic. 56 ~ Maiolettis reassembled pedestal monuments and stepped bases (II.1.3).

156

—

ἘΠ

Approximatesite of Norton's 1911 excavation hut

‘Mens. ee de.JetD Fic. 57 -Location plan: Tomb of the Good Shepherd complex, N. 241 (11.2.1) 1. Mudir's house; 2. Boundary wall; 3. Boundary wall

157

Fic. 59 - Rowe'sM. 7 Tomb of the Good Shepherd N. 241, cubiculum interior (1.2.1; 1.23)

158

Section CD

Mens et del. JerD

Fic. 60 - Plan and interior elevations of the Tomb of the Good Shepherd,N. 241 (11.2.3). 1a. Cubiculum;2a. Later Forma 8; 32. Later Forma 1; 4a. Forecourt; 5a. Quarryman's channelling trench; 6a. Exterior elevation; 7a. Sarcophagus; 8a. Rock-cut sarcophagi; 9a. Vault of Forma 8; 10a. Peacock mural; 11a. Good Shepherd mural; 12a. East elevation; 13a. South elevation; 14a. Projection; 15a. Rock cut sarcophagi.

159

Meas, et del. Jet D

Rowe's Tomb M. 16 TombN.13

Fic. 61 -- Location plan: Tomb N. 13 complex, including inserted Roman tomb (13.1). 1a. Conjectured defined area; 2a. Conjectured limits of forecourt; 3a. Site of destroyed tomb; 4a. Boundary wall; 5a. Assemblage XII; 63. Cremation receptacle; 7a. Stairs; 8a. Rocky outcrop; 9a. Pacho Inscription CIG 5175; 10a. Roman exedra

Fic. 63 - Rowe's M. 16 Tomb N. 13 forecourt with Loculi 1 and 2, 1952 (13.3)

161

Mens.

del, JD.

Fi, 64 -Plan and elevation of Rowe's excavated and surveyed loculi, TombsN. 13-N. 12 and N. 10 (1133). 1. Stairs; 2. Niches; 3. Unexcavated; 4. Loc. 1; 5. Loc. 2; 6. Forecourt; 7. Barrel-vaulted recess; 8. Funeral bust niches; 9. Exterior elevat n; 10, Cinerarium; 11. Vessel niches; Wide chamber.

Fic. 65 - Tomb N. 10 facade (113.3).

163

il

B

Bes

Ai Tomb N.13

7

πῇ

Ϊ

—

8

|

"EE : iu 3

LIE

ὁ

|

TombN.11 Mens. αι ἀεὶ Jer

Fic. 66 -Structural sequence of development Tombs N. 13-10 (113.4). 1. Conjectured Roman exedra; 2. Pacho inscription CIG 5175; 3. Stairs to Copland Tomb; 4. Phase 15; 5. Rocky outerop; 6. Phase 8 later; 7. Later doorslab; 8. Phase 14; 9. Phase 8 earlier; 10. Phase 10; 11. Unfinished loculus tomb; 12. Conjectured facade of destroyed tomb; 13. Phase 11.

Ancient road to Apollonia

After Rove

Fis, 67 - Location plan: range of Cyrene's archaic chamber Tombs N. 9-N. 2 (Π14.1}. 1. Gully; 2. Block sarcophagus;3. Projection; 4. Stylobate; 5. Tomb N. 1 bis 2; 6. Temenos wall.

164

Fic. 69 “Tombs N. 7-N. 9 - Weld-Blundell, 1894 (11.4.1).

165

Fic. 71 -- TombsN. 5-N. 6 portico facades (Π.4.3).

166

Fic. 72 - TombsN. 3-N. 4 portico fagades (1.43).

Fic. 73 - TombN. 2 portico facade (114.3).

167

MANC T Ὲ

‘Mens. et de. JetD

l Fic. 74 - Plan and elevation, Archaic Doric chamber Tomb N. 9 and Ionic chamber Tomb N. 8 (1.43). 1a. Gully; 2a, Anta removed; 3a. Niche; 4a. Forma; 5a. Projection removed; 6a. Iconic half-figure niche not

included; 7a: Square-headed arcosolium recess; 8a. Projection.

168

Mens et ἀεὶ JetD Fic. 75 - Plan and elevation, Archaic Doric chamber Tombs N. 7-N. 5 (11.43)

1. Niche; 2. Gully; 3. Projection; 4. Forma; 5. Quarryman's channelling trenches; 6. Rebate; 7. Arcosolium 1; 8. Arcosolium 2; 9. Mural; 10. Niches; 11. Theke; 12. Window; 13. Ossuary niche; 14. Earlier floor level; 15. Infiling; 16. Projection removed; 17. Stylobate,

169

Mens. et del 161

Fic. 76-- Plan and elevation, Aeolic chamber ‘TombsN. 4-N. 2 (1.43). 1. Niches; 2. Ossuary niche; 3. Inscription; 4. Klinai; 5. Ossuary niche; 6. Quarryman's wedge-slots; 7. Chamber; 8. Niches in anta.

170

Phase 1

Phase 2 ater

Phase 3 ‘Mens. et del.JetD

Fic. 77- Structural sequence of development, Tombs N. 5 and N. 7; N. 6 andN. 9 (1444). 1. Archaic road surface; 2, Rebate; 3. Projection,

Tomb N.2

Fic. 78 -Structural sequence of development, Tombs N. 2-N. 5 {Π|4.4}. 1, Quarryman's wedge-slots;2, Superimposed suggested pediment; 3. Archaic road surface.

‘Mens. ct del. Jet D

Phase 17 Phase 6

ea *

m

uo TebNI

Tomb

=

—À

ho TebNS o He Tomb NAO

z

Tomb N.3 Mens. et de. JetD Fic. 79 -- Structural sequence of development, Tombs N. 8, N. 10 and N. 401 (11.4.4) 1a. Rebate; 2a. Anta removed;3a. Archaic road surface;4a. Arcosolium;5a. Projection; 6a. Iconic half-figure

niche; 7a. Block sarcophagus; 8a. Phase 10; 9a. Phase 11.

Phase 17

Phase 18

Mens. et del. JetD.

Fic. 80 Structural sequence of development, Tomb N. 5 (11.4.4). 1. Gully; 2. Rebate; 3. Stylobate; 4. Archaic road surface; 5. Projection;6. Infil; 7. Window.

174

‘Mens. et del.) et D Fic, 81 -Location plan: Tomb N. 1 complexat head of Wadi Haleg Shaloof (1.5.1). 1. Klinai;2. Shaft; 3. Half-figure 1926; 4. Tomb N. 1 bis 2; 5. Conjectured defined area.

175

Fic, 83- Rowe's M. 15 Tomb N. 1, cleared, 1925 (115.23)

16

Fic. 84 - Rowe's M. 15 Tomb N. 1 showing shaft and klinai, 1925 (1.5.23).

Fic. 85 - Tomb N. 1 subterranean chamber calcite burial artifacts, 1925 (1.5.2)

177

Fic. 87-TombN. 1 bis 1 under excavation, 1926 (IL5.2)

178

Fic. 88 - Tomb N. 1 bis 2 - discovery of aniconic half-figure, 1926 (Π.5.2)

179

Fic. 90 -- Tomb N. 1 bis 1 -- miscellany ofburial artifacts, 1926 (1.5.2).

180

Fic. 92 -- Tomb N. 401 without built facade, 1952 (Π.5.3).

Fic. 94 - Tomb N. 34, rock-cut balustrade screen, unfinished lid behind (11.53).

182

d halí-igure, N. 1 bis 2 (1.5.1.2) ; 6. Doric capital found in

183

Mens. et ἀεὶ JetD Fic. 96 - Plan and elevation showing subterranean chamber shaft, Tomb N. 1; earlier temenos wall (IL5.3). 1. Construction trench;2. Paving slabs; 3. Roofing tiles;4. Shaft; 5. Present position of klinai; 6. Inscription; 8. Temenos wall

184

Section CD

Mens. etl. Jet.

Fic. 97 -Relationship of subterranean chamber with Tomb N. 1 bis 1 01.53). 1. Subterranean chamber; 2. Chamfered moulding; 3. Tomb N. 1 bis 1; 4. Temenos wall; 5. Shaft; 6. Slot; 7. Subterranean chamber.

186

poeti ieee

DONE

ener M KE POM

SrῬΑ

„m

ΠΣ

Fu

-

Mens. οἱ δεῖ Jer.

Fic. 99 -Elevations and plan of truncated Tomb N. 1 bis 1 and relationship with temenos wall (1L5.3). 1. North temenos wall; 2. Door slabs in situ; 3. Natural rock surface; 4. Robber hole; 5. Rock-cut grave; 6. Chamfered moulding; 7. Dressed surface; 8. Present position of klinai.

187

Fic. 100 - Panelled orthostat-built burial precinct Tomb N. 1 bis 2 (1.5.5). 1. Temenos wall; 2. Orthostat revealed in situ; 3. Naiskos; 4, Limit of 1926 clearance; 5. Limit of 2000 robbing; 6. Wide recessed panel; 7. Orthostat destroyed by 2000 robbing; 8. Panelled orthostat; 9. Lower level conjectured; 10. Reconstructed view; 11. Cluster of artifacts 12. Dividers.

188

Ancient road to Apollonia

10

‘Mens. del. et Fic. 101 -- Restored facade (1938) and plan of Tomb N. 401; views of burial precinct over N. 34 (I5), 1. Ossuary niche; 2. Forma; 3. Loculus; 4. Forecourt; 5. After Rowe; 6. Boundary wall; 7. Unfinished lid; 8. Sill;9. Shallow niche; 10. Unexcavated; 11. Limits of loculus below; 12. Dressed surface.

189

Phase 12 later Mens. edd.)

aD

Fic. 102 -Structural sequence of development, Tombs N. 1 and N. 1 bis 1-2 (115.4). 1. Isodomic temenos wall; 2. Conjectured primary position of klinai; 3. Remains of Phase 9 earlier temple tomb; 4. Remains of Phase 9later temenos wall; 5. Final position of klinai; 6. Shaft; 7. Low bench.

190

‘Primary appearance loeisN34 Tomb

TombN.401

9

‘Tomb N.2

Fic. 103 ~ Structural sequence of development around Tomb N. 1 - earlier and later phases (115.4). 1, Site of destroyed superstructure; 2. Phase 7; 3. Phase 5; 4. Phase 12 earlier; 5. Phase 9 later; 6. Phase 13 earlier; 7. Naiskos; 8. Phase 13later; 9. Phase 11.

191

Rowe's Tomb M.8 — TombN.57

C;

N

o

mw

sm

Fic. 104 -Location plan: eastern slope of Wadi Haleg Shaloof, Tomb N. 57 (IL). 1. Defined area; 2. Boundary stones; 3. Track; 4. Built facade step

=?

Θ m Mens. et del. eeD

192

- Shrine Tomb N. 57 constructed above lost built facade of N. 58, adjoining N. 59 (11.63). Fic, 106

193 Rowe's Tomb M. 5

—

Mens. et del JD.

Fic. 107 -- Views and sections of panelled orthostat-built shrine TombN. 57 (11.63). 1. Block stele sockets; 2. Small sockets; 3. Reconstructed view;4. Back elevation; 5. Front elevation; 6. Rebated sill 7. Enchytrismoson site of Tomb N. 58 entablature; 8. Rebatefor divider; 9. Chamfered sill; 10. Door slab; 11, Rebated sill; 12. Chamfered sil; 13. Limits of Burton Brown's trench; 14, Site of divider; 15. Door slab.

ee

194

Mens t del. Jet D

Fic. 108 Structural sequence of development, Tombs N. 57-N. 58 (11.6.4). 1, Screen conjectured; 2. Inserted euthynteria; . Site of defined area; 4. Defined area.

195

Rowe's Tomb M.3 “TombN. 157

> [d

Fic. 109 - Location plan: western slope ofEl Mawy land, Tombs N. 197-N. 198 (11.7.1). 1. Assemblage XXIII; 2. Casket; 3. Block sarcophagus; 4. Slab X; 5. Loculus sarcophagus; 6. Slab Y Assemblage XXII. 7. Block sarcophagus.

196

Fic. 110—Rowe’s M. 3 Tomb N. 197 facade partly cleared, 1952 (11.73).

Swans

Fic. 111 - Rowe's M. 3 Tomb N. 197 loculi partly excavated, 1952 (1.7.3).

197

Εἰς. 112 -Rowe'sM. 3 TombN. 197 forecourt loculus sarcophagus, 1955 (7.3).

198

Fic. 113 - Rowe's Tomb N. 198A forecourt debris, 1955 (1.7.2).

199

a Fic. 115 - Tomb N. 198 buried in hillwash (117.3).

200 Rowe's Tomb M.3 and N. 198

Fic. 116- Tomb N. 197 facade loculus excavated by Rowe; N. 198 facade loculus surveyed by Rowe (117.3) 1a. Rock-cut screen; 2a. Block sarcophagus; 3a. SEG XVI; 4a. Hydria recess; 5a. Drilled holes; 6a. Notch for cover slab; 7a. Cremation receptacle; 8a. Assemblage XXIV; 9a. Assemblage XXV-XXVI; 10a, Assemblage XXI; 11a. Assemblage XIX; 12a. Door slab in situ; 13a. Quarryman’s channelling trench for orthostats; 14. Assemblage VI; 15a. Vessel/cremation niche; 16a. Entablature sil; 17a. Stairs; 18a. Forecourt; 192. Loculus sarcophagus; 20a. Assemblage XX; 21a. Unexcavated forecourt; 222. Conjectured plan.

201

Tomb N. 197 stele inscription

Phase 2 =

—

Unexcavared

Phise 3

Rowe's Tomb N. 198B

os

Phase 3 Rowe's Sarcophagus Rowe's Tomb Μ. 3. Phasel

N98

"TombN. 197

AR

Rowe'svone pe Pine Phued ᾿ς

ἢ

Phmes Mens. et del Jet D

Fic. 117 - Rowe's Day Book: artifact identification,N. 197-198 forecourt; suggested sequence of development of tombs (117.2,4). 1. Assemblage XXIII; 2. Assemblage XIX; 3. ‘Four stele frags’ 4. Assemblage XXII.

202

Mens. εἰ del. Jet

Fic, 118 - Location plan: eastern slope of El Mawy land, showing relationship of Tombs N.201-N. 202 (IL8.1). 1. Conjectured terraced enclosure; 2. Boundary stones; 3. Assemblage V.

203

Fic. 119 Rowe's M. 6 shrine Tomb N. 201 covered by hillwash before excavation, 1952 (11.83).

204

Fic. 121 - Rowe's M. 2 temple Tomb N. 202 buried in hillwash, 1952 (1.8.3).

205

Fic. 122 - Rowe's M. 2 temple Tomb N. 202 unburied side, 1952 (1.8.3).

206

Section CD °

2m

‘Mens. et de.JetD

Fic, 123 - Views and sections of panelled orthostat-built shrine Tomb N. 201 (11.8.3). 1. Hillwash; 2. Front elevation; 3. Chamfered sill; 4. Unexcavated;5. Back elevation; 6. Door slab.

207

Aare. τὰ τρῶς. WEN

$3

Conjecored configuration iei

Mesedd].aD

Fic. 124 - Views and sections of plain orthostat-built temple Tomb N. 202; roof slab configuration (I8 3-4) 1a. Rebate; 2a, Reconstructed end view; 3a. Hillwash; 4a. Divider; 5a. Grave; 6a. Assemblage V; 7a. Gully; 8a. Euthynteria, rock-cut limestone base; 9a. Euthynteria, rock-cut limestone base; 10a. Unexcavated; 1a. Irregular central plinth; 12a. Robber hole; 13a. Plinth

208

Rowe's Tomb E. 161 =, TombE 161

: []

5m

= Rowe's Tomb E. 161:A ἜΣ

N Mens. Abdul Rheem et ἀεὶ. Jet

Fic. 125 — Location plan: Abderrahim Mohammed Larbid land, Tombs E. 160-161 (1.9.1). 1. Assemblage XV; 2. Assemblage XVIIA; 3. Assemblage XVI; 4. Assemblage XIV; 5. M. 185 published position;6. Assemblage XIII; 7. Assemblage XVIIB, XVIII; 8. M. 202 published position

Fic. 127 - Tomb E. 161 before excavation, 1952 (1.9.1)

210

Fic. 128 - Tomb E. 161 tumulus under excavation, 1955 (119.1).

211

Fic. 129 — Tomb E. 161 clearing of burial chamber, 1955 (IL9.1)

212

Eadie extent of excavation

— Rowe's Day Book: plan, E. 160-E. 161; ‘Northern Projection’, E. 161; tumulus detail (1L.9.1-2) Fic. 130 1. Ruins of Tomb E. 155; 2. Assemblage XV; 3. Partially buried blocks.

21

WIRT

eta a

Dese rf τρὶς

des 614/55

ae

Ί y

m"

saws don

Jane bpd

ΠΕ

Hau, il A

v

out

fats

cad ad

lan VJ sb

NIAE!

onl

os

1955. Day Book 6th September

DEM

LR μὰ

Vel bee Galt. Lol tle Day Book 7th September 1955,

eel ete,

Fic. 131 - Rowe's Day Book: annotated stepped ‘annexe’ Tomb E. 160 (1L9.2).

214

Plan of blocking

Blocking of Eastern Compartment

Dimensions of Southern Chamber

Fic. 132 - Rowe's Day Book: structural elements and ' Southern Room’, Tomb E. 161 (11.92). 1.M. 193 fragment; 2. (M, 194) fragment; 3. Bead and reel details; 4. Section; 5. Mason's mark; 6. Easter Compartment;7. Western Compartment; 8. Upper block; 9. Recessive moulding;10. Lower block; 11. Debris.

215

3 aaaer uix Reconstructed end view

Fic. 133 - Views and sectionsof the ‘annexe’, Tomb E. 160 (1.93). 1. Flat slabs; 2. Freestanding pilaster; 3. Pilaster; 4. Orthostats;5. M. 185 fieldnotes position.

216

Rowe's Tomb E. 161

134 - View from above of TombE. 161 (11.93).

1 ‘Ne lorthern Projection’; 2. M. 202 fieldnotes position; 3. i slab removed by Rowe; 4. Paving slabs; 5 s ; 6. Votive deposit slabs; 7. ‘Southern Room’ 8. slabs.

217

Rowe's Tomb E, 161-4 “Tomb E. 160

Rowe's Tomb E 161-A “TombE, 160

0

Mens. et del} ee

Fic. 135 - View of the external sides and view of sections of Tomb E. 161 (11.93). 1. Southern room’; 2. Eastern elevation; 3. ‘Northern Projection’; 4. Assemblage XVIIA; 5. Votive deposit slabs; 6. Shaft; 7. "Wall a’; 8. Inner revetment; 9. Main burial chamber; 10. Assemblage XVIIB, XVIII, 11. Paving slabs; 12. M. 206 register position; 13. M. 207a-b fieldnotes position; 14. ‘Wall c'; 15. Flat slabs; 16. Inserted blocks; 17. Wall δ΄; 18. Main burial chamber; 19. ‘Wall a’; 20. Paving slabs; 21. M. 207ab, position of colonnettes;22. Naiskos; 23. M. 185 aniconic head; 24. M. 202 marble shaft.

218

D

3m

MenserdelJerD

Fic. 136 Cutaway view from above of Tomb E. 161 (11.93). 1. Inner revetment; 2. "Wall a’; 3. M. 206 register position; 4. Shaft; 5. Main burial chamber; 6. "Wall δ᾽; 7. Wallο᾽, 8. M. 207a.b fieldnotes position; 9. M. 210 fieldnotes position.

219

Phase 1

Phase2

Tomb

ΤΟΙ

Byenraal site of ‘Tomb E. 161

‘Tomb E. 160

Mens. et del JerD. Fic. 137 - Suggested sequence of development, Tombs F. 160-161 and marble aniconic female herm {Π|9.4}. 1. Southern Room; 2. Partial destruction of Tomb E. 160; 3. M. 185; 4. Marble flake (M. 185 bis); 5. M. 202.

Fic. 139 - Rowe's M. 5 mastaba Tomb E. 19 south side with temple Tomb E. 20 beyond, 1952 (1.103)

221

Fic. 141 - Rowe's M. 5 mastaba Tomb E. 19 excavated south-western corner, 1952 (1102.3).

222

Fic. 142 - Rowe'sM. 5 mastaba Tomb E. 19 block sarcophagus, eastern end, 1952 (II.10.2).

223

Fic. 143 - Rowe'sM. 5 mastaba Tomb F. 19 block sarcophagus, western end, 1952 (11.102).

224

Mens.erde. Je D.

Fic. 144 - Views and sections of Rowe's mastaba Tomb E. 19 ( 103). 1. Assemblage IX; 2. Unexcavated; 3. Assemblage VIII; 4. Di ler stone; 5. Block sarcophagus; 6. Vertical slot; 7. Divider stone.

225

Fic. 145.- Rowe's M. 4 Tomb E. 174 general view looking east, 1952 (1.113).

Fic. 146- Rowe's M. 4 Tomb E. 174 crepidoma looking north-east, 1952 (1.11.3).

226

Fic. 147 - Rowe's M. 4 Tomb E. 174 study of ring wall on crepidoma, 1952 (Π|11.3}.

227

Fic. 148 -Rowe’s M. 4 Tomb E. 174 interior, study of cist 2 looking south-east, 1952 (Π.11.3}.

228

TonbE 161

‘Tomb E174

Ment edel JD

Fic. 149 - Rowe's Tomb E. 174: plan and reconstructed view, section and possible tumulus, including a comparison with Tomb E. 161 (IL11.1, 3-4) 1. Cleared area; 2. Approximate position; 3. Assemblage VIT; 4. Exposed face;5. Ancient track; 6, Intended revetment; 7. Inner ring wall based on Tomb E. 161; 8. Revetment based on Tomb E. 161; 9. Main burial chamber.

229

z——

Ὁ Rowe'sTomb M10. 2 Tembs.s1

E 3

2 ὦ 4

10m

Mens. et del JerD Fic. 150 - Location plan: Ali Mahmoudy Mohammed land, Tombs 5. 80.8, 85 (II.12.1) 1. Beschi’s Tomb S. 80 bis; 2. Assemblage X; 3. Cist grave; 4. Boundary stones; 5. Tomb S. 85,

230

Fic. 152 - Rowe's M. 9 Tomb 8.80 after excavation, 1952 (1.12.1.3

231

Fic. 153 - Rowe'sM. 10 Tomb S. 81 general view looking west, 1952 (11.123).

232

Fic, 154 - Rowe's M. 10 Tomb 8. 81, excavated cist looking cast (Π.12.3.

233

Fic. 156 —Rowe's M. 13 Tomb S. 84 before excavation showing track alongside, 1952 (11.12.3).

234

Beschi (1973) Fig. 72 Cat 29 Gyr. Mus. Ins. 11,146

Fig. 157 - View and plan of Rowe's and Beschi’s Tombs S. 80, S. 80 bis; marble half-figure (11.123). 1. Beschi’s Tomb S. 80 bis; 2. Socle; 3. Modern pit; 4. Half figure.

235

Mens. Abdul Rheem et del Jet D Fic. 158 - Location plan: bordering the ancient road to Balagrae, Tomb S. 77 (11.13.1). 1a. Cur. 1; 2a, Assemblage XT; 3a. China. 2; 4a. Boundary; 5a. Socket for herm; 6a. Large circular tomb.

236

Fic. 160-- Rowe's M. 14 Tomb S. 77 before excavation, ancient road in foreground, 1952 (1113.3).

237

Fic. 162 - Rowe'sM. 14 Tomb S. 77 before excavation, Crs 2 and 1, 1952 {Π.15.3}.

238

]

D

ΤΙ

-

Seton CD

Τ

[

E u 9

Mess Abdi Rem edel Jet

Fic. 163 — External view and sections of built circular burial plot, Tomb 5. 77 (113.3). 1. Cre. 1; 2. Cun. 2; 3. Sarco. 3; 4. Sarco. 4; 5. Quarried trench; 6. Spliced blocks; 7. Assemblage XT; 8, Boundary wall; 9. Quarried trench.

IIL1.0 Tomb Studies

The third and fourth campaigns in 1956 and 1957 were to clear nearly half an acre in an area beside the ancient road to Apollonia overlooked by the Kenissich complex Tombs N. 66, N. 84 where Rowe found tombs surrounded by sarcophagus enclosures (Figs. 34, 164-165). Some idea of the former appearance of this area can be gained from the lower slopes of the hillside, where three terraced rows of sarcophagi are buried up to their lids in hillwash, and terraced at the foot of the hill is a concentration of rock-cut loculus tombs, N. 86, N. 89-92 and N. 258, extensively recorded by Porcher in 1861, but the only photograph, taken immediately prior to his excavations, exists in the collections of the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut in Rome (Figs. 27-28,

201). Rowe's excavation co-ordinates were based on tombs classified previously by Cassels as N. 83, N. 82 and N. 81, excavated in that order (1.2.4). In his third campaign in 1956 the N. 83 area was stripped clear, with the rock-cut graves and sarcophagi excavated, except for an isolated group (Fig. 188) The 1956 Day Book, preserved in the Burns archive, is a quarto-sized blue exercise book commencing on July Ist, consisting of forty-eight pages of neatly-written notes and sketches by site assistant T. Holliday.’ Information has been extracted from this book and shown in italics in the following sections headed ‘Archaeological Work’ in this Chapter. The method of recording has changed from that of the previous campaign, because Rowe was no longer studying individual tombs but mainly sarcophagi, identifying them by capital letters preceded by Cassels’ number for the adjacent tomb as a co-ordinate This meant that his earlier recording technique had to be modified from an alphabetical system to that of a numerical list for comments and artifacts, the latter subsequently annotated with their assigned register numbers. The notebook comes to an end with the opening of the four sarcophagi in Enclosure N. 83-BK on August 7th, where in this instance the dimensions of the lids are given (Figs. 181-187). This campaign saw the use of an 8mm cine film recording the openings with the use of two long wooden levers, and the excavation team of twelve men gives an insight into the colossal weight of the lids. One sees Holliday recording the interior of sarcophagus N. 83-BG, resting this exercise book on the rim of the case. The artifacts when removed were given to Olga Rowe, who placed a spool of paper in the necks, showing their location and provisional site number. They are shown later being cleaned and placed on the same table as used in the previous campaign, mentioned above? The registered artifacts were not annotated with their new numbers in Rowe's Day ? ? > * ?

Rowe IL Figs. X, XIV. Rowe IT Figs. X, XIV; Cassels (1955), 27-28 Fig. 4. Burns Arch. Rowe's 1956 Day Book RoweIl Figs. X, XIV. Rowe Arch. Manchester cache 8mm cine film, spool 3, (events 99-101, 121-126, 130); spool 1, (events 1-7).

242

Book, only the quantity of artifacts found, the calculations for which were written by Rowe on the back of an unused page of the Object Register, roughly folded and placed after the last description in the exercise book (Figs. 184, 187). The survey of the excavations and planning of Tomb N. 83 were done by Holliday, with the painted murals done in watercolour on half-imperial sheets of paper, as were some studies of the burial artifacts.” The reason why Rowe did not annotate his Day Book for photographic records is explained below by David Dixon, Rowe's archaeological assistant; this consisted of 79 frames, suggesting that ten rolls of film were used in this campaign, some of which were used in Rowe's publication.* In the fourth and final campaign of 1957 the N. 82 and Ν. 81 areas were mainly cleared, but Rowe was selective in the tombs and sarcophagi he studied. Although the 1957 Day Book has not been found, contemporary personal notes by Dixon’give one a description of Rowe's system and archaeological methods, and ate included in the relevant sections of this Chapter as they provide valuable information.” This is apparent when, for example, one consults his final report for the extent of his activities concerning the contents of eleven sarcophagi which because of their incompleteness remained unpublished. ‘Another problem is that the broken surface finds from enclosures, in most cases discarded material by tomb-robbers ofthe 18th century and later in the Ottoman period, may have originated from nearby burials, and therefore may include clutches of complete artifacts from a protected source, which is unclear on the available documentary evidence. Deductions can be made on the original location of artifacts based on links provided by various tangible pieces of evidence such as the original site labels found, Dixon’s notes, Rowe's final publication and joining fragments giving clues to the extent of an assemblage. This still leaves a residue of unprovenanced artifacts, whose origin can only be finally proven by the rediscovery of Rowe's original register and its duplicate. I refer only to significant pieces within each assemblage; the complete range can be judged from the Catalogue of Artifacts.” The overall sequence of events has been isolated in Rowe's three areas (Figs. 167-169). I have provisionally identified them as modules of development, and ignore minor alterations within the rock-cut tombs themselves. The terrain is overlooked by archaic Tomb N. 416, cut in an outcrop above the ancient road, outside which is a broad sarcophagus associated with a Type A. 3 tomb (Fig. 210). On the hillslope below was a scatter of rock-cut graves, apparently following solar orientation. Cut into this scatter and superseding it, as if representing the beginnings of a more organized burial system, the terraced sarcophagus enclosures in N. 83 area on the eastern side are shallow and have broad lids, compared with those in N. 81 area on the west, which are deeper with narrow lids (Figs. 304-305), and are laid out more formally (Figs. 165-166). Sarcophagus lids with their diagnostic acroteria are occasionally seen closely associated with Tonic fagaded rock-cut tombs of Types C. 2.3 (Fig. 215). Under the heading of ‘Recording and Clearance of Sarcopbagé David Dixon gives the following description of the work. The cleared sarcophagi were ‘sketched in his Field notebook by the Archaeological Assistant and numbered’, with points being noted such as lid and pedestal forms, the existence of cramp holes or lifting bosses, slots cut in the lid, inscriptions, ‘Boles along the edge of the lid’, the presence of ‘plaster’ holding the lid and the position of robber holes, while the * Burns Arch. Rowe's 1956 Day Book fol. 25. ? Rowe II Figs. X-XII Pls. AB. * Dixon Arch. personal notes fol. 6; Rowe II Pl. 5:17. ? Dixon Arch. fols. 11-12. ? Thorn (1994),104-106, " Artifacıs Catalogue, categories 1-266 Figs. 306-426,

243

tomb numbers and types were entered in a ‘Key List’. ‘They were then photographed and entered in the Photograph Book’, after which they were measured by the Architect and drawn ‘to scale o the Plan.’ “The next stage was the raising of the lid which, because of inadequate equipment, ‘could only be partially removed’ by levering, ‘leaving just enough space for a man to climb in and work. ‘If intact and/or otherwise of importance, the grave was photographed’, but no scale drawing was made. It was then ‘cleared of objects’, whose details as they were handed out were ‘recorded by the Archaeological Assistant in his Field Notebook’, and the ‘earth removed from it was systematically sieved.’ The burial artifacts were placed ‘in a basket with a slip of paper bearing the grave number and given to a workman for washing. After clearance of the sarcophagi the interior measurements were taken and entered in the ‘Key List’, and any bones found were replaced, after only ‘a cursory examination’. The lid was replaced and ‘at the close of the day's work, the labelled baskets of objects were checked and taken into tbe Magazine’ The next morning Rowe and his Assistant would go there to ‘enter the contents of the baskets in the Object Register’, giving for each its number, description, material, size, provenance, photograph number and date found, and a carbon ‘copy of the Object Register was made for the Antiquities Dept.’ After this the burial artifacts were marked and then arranged in the storeroom in numerical order, later being ‘systematically checked with the Object Register to ensure that no numbers had been duplicated or omitted... No corpus of pottery was compiled, nor were new types drawn, it being considered adequate to reproduce them by photography. In the Photographic Book the details recorded were the photographic number followed by the ‘description of the view or the tomb number & the direction towards which one was looking.’ Most of the burial artifacts were photographed at the end of the season, with the Object Register number recorded. Late in the season ‘a Tomb Group Book was compiled, in which the numbers of all the graves were entered from the ‘Key List... Then below each tomb number were entered (from the Object Register) the numbers of the objects from that tomb. One then had a list of objects in consecutive orderas found with descriptions (= Object Register) and a Catalogue of Tomb Groups. Next, the objects in the Store-room were examined with the Tomb Group Book before one, and a mark placed above the numbers of those objects in each tomb which were to be photographed. The objects were then photographed, singly or in groups; finally the ‘Photo No.’ of each object was inserted from the Photographic Book in the appropriate column of the Object Register. 4 prints were made of every photograph, 1 for the publication, 1 for the Dept. of Antiquities, 2 for the (?) University of Manchester.’ An Architecture Book was compiled by the Archaeological Assistant, giving numbers and depths of tombs, entered from the ‘Key List’. The Architect then noted details of architectural features which had, in fact, been done earlier. ‘The only things to be done really were the cross-section of various parts of the area cleared, the scale drawing of the pedestals & slots, and the reproduction of inscriptions.

AY

‘In sum, the completed records of the expedition consisted of: Ll. A Key List’ of tombs wherein was noted the No. and description of each. 2. The Object Register, a list of the objects from the tombs in order as found, with a description of each, its measurements, provenance, and a reference to the No. of the Photograph in which it appeared. The Photographic Book, wherein each photo was numbered and described. A Tomb Group Book in which all the objects from each tomb were gathered together, with an indication which of them had been photographed.

5.

An Architecture Book containing details and measurements of the tombs.’

About 160 frames were taken by T. N. Ainscow, implying that 20 rolls of film had been used, of which Dixon had duplicates. Among these are the first known photographic records of burial

244

artifacts in situ in the Cyrenaica, and about half are post-excavation group shots, mainly of complete vessels, which were eventually used in the publication.” A structural sequence of events has been isolated. Note: the same phase numbers cover all three areas. N. 83 Area (Figs. 167-168) Phase Archaic

1 Scatter of rock-cut graves (Figs. 166, 178, 180)

Classical-Hellenistic 3 Sarcophagus Group N. 83-BN - BU (Fig. 188)

4 Cutting of Doric loculus Tomb N. 83 (Fig. 174 Phase 2) 5 Cutting of sarcophagus Enclosures N. 83-S, N. 83-U and subsequently N. 83-W (Figs. 174 Phase 3, 179, 180) 6 Cutting of Tomb N. 83-BF (Figs. 178, 188 Phase 1) 7 Cutting of Enclosure N. 83-BK for Sarcophagi N. 83-BI, BJ and later N. 83-BG, BH (Fig. 188 Phases 23) 8 Cutting of rock-cut graves N. 83-AY, BC and BD by enclosures (Figs. 180-181, 193). Later burials and replacement of stelai on Sarcophagi N. 83-BH and BJ (Fig. 257). Possible cutting of Tombs N. 83-BF bis and N. 83 bis (Figs. 174-175, 178-179). Roman 15 Removal of sarcophagi stelai in Enclosure N. 83-BK possibly for reworking as funeral busts (Fig. 181) 16 Tomb N. 83 adapted as cubiculum, spoil deposited in Enclosure N. 83-BK (Figs. 167-174 Phase 5, 181). Enclosure N. 83-W removed to enlarge forecourt N. 83-Z, truncating rock-cut Sarcophagus N. 83-AD, insertion of grave and formae in floor of Tomb N. 83 including Grave 10 (Fig. 174 Phase 6, 180-181) 17 Earthquake damage A. D. 365, building of Demetria grave, painting of inscription. Cutting of cistern N. 83-X (Fig. 174 Phase 7)

N. 82 Area (Figs. 167-168) Phase Archaic 1 Possible scatter of rock-cut graves destroyed (Fig. 166) Classical-Hellenistic 5. Subsequent cutting of sarcophagus Enclosure N. 82-1 (Fig. 193) 11 Cutting of sarcophagus Enclosures N. 82-23,24 (Fig. 193) Roman 15 Stripping of weathered surface of limestone, cutting of quarry and destruction of N. 82-24 (Fig. 190) 16 Cutting of cubiculum Tomb N. 82 in abandoned quarry (Figs. 190-191) 17 Earthquake damage of 365 A. D. and building of Graves C and D in Tomb N. 82 contemporary with that to Demetriain Tomb N. 83 (Figs. 174 Phase 7, 191) Ottoman. 18 Occupation of Tomb N. 82 and cutting of drain though Sarcophagus N. 82-5 (Fig. 193) ? Rowe Il Pls, 18-42.

245

N. 81 Area (Fig. 169) Phase Archaic 1 Probable scatter of rock-cut graves destroyed (Fig. 166) Classical-Hellenistic 2 Cutting of Tomb N. 81-A with forecourt N. 81-b and pair of flanking sarcophagi (Fig. 198) 9 Cutting of Tomb N. 81 with forecourt N. 81-AN subsequently including Tomb N. 81 bis (Fig. 195) 10 Cutting of Tomb N. 81.0 with precinct and Sarcophagi N. 81-UU, VV with temenos wall behind (Figs. 198, 200). Cutting of Upper and subsequently Lower Enclosures N. 81-B, causing alterations to Tomb N. 81-A and removal of possible western sarcophagus (Fig. 202) 11 Building of temple Tomb N. 77 in precinct of Tomb N. 81-O (Fig. 200) 12 Cutting of formal Enclosures N. 81-BB, KK and part of AB by Enclosure N. 81-AN (Figs. 203, 206) 13 Cutting of island Sarcophagi N. 81:11, XX and N. 81-AI, AJ, followed by later cutting of a small square enclosure in the Peripheral Area (Fig. 206) 14 Cutting of terraced Sarcophagi N. 81-AK to AM and subsequently those in the Peripheral Area (Fig. 206)

Roman 16 Adaption of Tomb N. 81 as a cubiculum with arcosolia (Fig. 195) ROCK.CUT TOMBS N. 83 AREA Rock-cur Toms N. 83 ΠΙ.1.1 Historical Background

The terrain is cut by the ancient road which runs on top of a ridged outcrop extending from the eastern side of Wadi Haleg Shaloof, overlooked by a number of rock-cut tombs in the Kenissich area, where Halbherr recorded in a view the archaic Tomb N. 416 above Tomb N. 84 (Figs. 34, 210, 236). Still visible were ‘deep worn ruts’ in the ancient road surface," probably those surviving as late as 1908 which disappeared a few years later when the military road was laid over it by General Tassoni's division (1.1.1). On the slope below the road in 1825 Pacho recorded Tomb N. 83, giving an interior view of the cubiculum showing debris, painted Arcosolium 12 and paintcd inscriptions IIa, b (Figs. 172-173). In 1861 Lieutenant Porcher planned the interior, giving a section across Graves 3-4 and Arcosolium 5 showing mensa slabs in situ. He showed in two watercolours the tomb still filled with debris, inscription Ib painted in red (VIL43) and, built by the ceiling, the nests of swallows which still return today." In 1904 Hogarth showed the interior cleared of debris" and in 1914 Comparetti studied inscription IIb." In 1925 ‘detta tomba era stata

arbitrariamente adibita come deposito di concime.’® Cassels registered the tomb and inscription ΠΡ when it was uninhabited, but in 1956 when Rowe planned the tomb he noticed small arcas of ash from recent Bedouin hearths in the comers of the cubiculum.”” He recorded the position of in» © ® ™ * ®

Oliverio (1931), 282 Fig. 61, Hamilton (1856),70. Gregory (1909) PL. opp. 10. Smith and Porcher (1864), 31 Pls. 17, 31; Bacchielli (1993), 98-99 Fig. 24 Hogarth (1905) Pl. opp. 98 Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ph. 22:G. 1. Ant. Dept. Orr. Lett. Book fo. 17. Cassels (1955), 21-22, 27; Rowe IL, 11 Fig, X inset.

246

scriptions Ib and Π with Ainscow making a photographic mosaic in 1957. The case wall of Arcosolium 8 had been complete when Hogarth saw it, but had deteriorated and was destroyed by 1956. Holliday’s watercolours showed parts of the mural in Arcosolium 12, but his originals are now lost? The tomb murals and inscriptions have since been restudied and published by Professor Bacchielli and Dr Joyce Reynolds.” Since publication these have been disfigured in places by charcoal graffiti, which makes their article an even more definitive record. IIL.1.2 Archaeological Work Extracts from Day book fol. 4 In rock-cut grave N. 83-O were found: "Traces human skull, Fragment black ware, Clay bead’; above this is a Late Roman ashlar-built grave (Fig. 301). Roman cistern N. 83-X contained ‘Fragment base of amphora’ which probably provided the dating evidence used by Rowe. The main Tomb N. 83 cubiculum Forma 3 was cleared of recent debris and intrusive artifacts, consisting of ‘Handle of jar, Small slab marble, Fragments coarse bowl rin (Assem.

XXIX; Fig. 333 nos. 373-375).*

111.13 Structural Description The tomb is terraced into the hillside, a short distance down from the ancient road, facing the lower plateau with the sea beyond (Figs. 165, 172) Forecourt: rock-cut enclosure with a well-dressed floor L. 4. 60 W. 2. 80m, the original entrance in line with Loc. 1 facing Enclosure N. 83-W (Fig. 180); a continuous step runs around three sides, which on the eastern side continued for 1. 70m but was subsequently cut back. On the northern side of the enclosure is the vertically truncated end of an earlier rock-cut grave on the same axis as N. 82-20 (Fig. 179). The western side, which was capped with isodomic work and probably a ridged coping, forms the boundary wall between this forecourt and Enclosure N. 82-24 (Fig. 193). On the eastern side near the facade is a funeral bust niche, altered at the back by the cutting of a circular hole connecting it with a later large, rock-cut cistern N. 83-X." This cistern H.

1.86 L. 2.60 W. 1. 52m vertically truncated the rock-cut grave N. 83-L (Fig. 166); across its cut

end a small wall was built and mortared, and the cistern was also lined with the same hard, pinkish mortar which covers the tomb facade and forecourt walls.” The north-east corner was later extended eastwards L. 2. 40 W. 1. 86m, encroaching on to Enclosure N. 83-S, whose floor is 0. 55m above that of the Tomb N. 83 forecourt, to form the present boundary which also extends across Sarcophagus N. 83-AD (Fig. 179). The forecourt is overlooked on the south by the now raised Sarcophagus N. 83-Q and on the north by an isodomic-built wall, one course of which survives, incorporating the rock-cut threshold of the original entrance to the Tomb N. 83 forecourt; “the top of the wall is level with the floor of Enclosure N. 83-8. This part of the forecourt floor includes two rock-cut graves, N. 83-O with a rebated lid and N. 83-T (Fig, 301). The final alteration to this enclosure is a

® ® > » » ® ® %

Fairman Arch, Rowe Phs. 13-14; Rowe II Pls. 15b-c; Cassels (1955) Pl. VIa. Rowe II, 10-11 Pls. A,B. Bacchielli (1992), 5-22. Rowe Il, 10, 24 Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 66; Rowe II PL 5b. Fairman Arch, Rowe Ph. 18; Rowe IT PL. 14c Bacchielli (1992), 8 Fig. 7. Fairman Arch. Rowe Phs. 66, 17; Rowe II Pls. 5b, 15a.

247

built grave above rock-cut Grave N. 83-O, consisting of a course of reused ashlar butting against a sarcophagus lid on its side placed on the boundary line (Figs. 174, 179). A later gully crosses the forecourt floor from the cistern towards the entrance.” Facade: On the south side are two loculus entrances with a sill above for the lost built entablature (Figs. 170, 291). The loculi entrances and surrounds are finished with a chisel, but Loc. 2 opening was cut with a mason’s pin. The lengths of the loculi were destroyed by the cutting of the cubiculum; Loc. 1 survives only as a small square feature in the cubiculum steps, L. 0. 58 W. 0. 68m, possibly the original floor to a shallow loculus grave. The square opening H. 1. 23 W. 0. 85m of Loc. 2 indicates that double-level loculi were intended, but abandoned in the early stages of cutting (Fig. 174). Cubiculum chamber H. 4. ΟἹ L. 5. 84 W. 5. 93-5. 50m, its surfaces crudely dressed with a claw chisel. Nine steps H. 1. 80m lead down to the chamber floor. Architectural details such as pilasters show roughing-out suitable for plaster rendering. Two later formae flank the entrance, Forma 3 cutting through the arcosolium step H. 0. 22 W. 0. 39m which runs around the cubiculum, with the built Grave 4 of Demetria identified by the Christian inscription IIb above; ‘To left of inscription are 3 lamp niches with traces smoke over each’ (Fig. 299)." Forma 13 is below the earlier Loc. 2, with part of its slab in situ above floor level, forming a dais in front of Arcosolium 12 (Fig. 294). A square, centrally-placed cut feature suggests the site of some form of focal point within the chamber. The cubiculum is divided into bays by plain pilasters with bevelled capitals, H. 2. 09 W. 0. 52m, bordering the arcosolia, the more ornate sculpted ones to the south (Figs. 171-173). The east and west walls each have identical pairs of bays, but on the east side Arcosolium 5 has a plain conch while Arcosolium 6 has a sculpted conch. On the west side Arcosolium 11 resembles the latter, but the conch of Arcosolium 12 differs by having a decorative mural of a winged figure with pairs of smaller figures, peacocks and smaller birds above a lattice- and floral-patterned dado. The case is geometrically decorated with comer swags (Fig. 294). The south wall has the centrally-placed Arcosolium 8 with a sculpted conch bordered by pilasters which were reduced in width, shown by a rebate, to accommodate two flanking rectangular Niches 7 and 9 with space cut for lintels (Figs. 299-300). Grave 10 is a raised forma cut at right angles behind the recess of Niche 9 (Fig. 238). Inscription Ia above the lintel level of Niche 9 may relate to this grave, also Inscription Ib in the south-west comer which fills the entire spandrel to Arcosolium 11 (VII. 4. 3; Fig. 173). IIL.1.4 Observations

The tomb forecourt and facade are the same style and arrangement as the two-loculi Tomb N. 38 on the eastern slope of Wadi Haleg Shaloof (Figs. 9, 34, 221). Tomb N. 83 Loc. 2 was in the carly stages of being formed, but an intended lower level was never cut. No defined area above and behind the tomb fagade is evident, as the exposed natural rock surface is featureless. The nearby niche points to the possibility that, like Tomb N. 10, the entablature may have contained others, which would indicate the reuse of this tomb in the early Roman period (Figs. 172, 174, 296). The forecourt seems to have been enlarged, with the removal of a rock-cut sarcophagus, the lid being reused to form the new boundary to Enclosure N. 83-S. Cutting of the cubiculum chamber began

through Loc. 1, the masons’quarry chippings being removed and dumped lower down the slope in Enclosure N. 83-BK which is 18. 75m away, on a direct line with Loc. 1 entrance (Figs. 165-166, 172, 181). The cubiculum and arrangement of arcosolia are similar to that of Tomb N. 241 (Figs.

? Rowe II Fig. X. Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 17; Rowe ΠΡΙ. 15a. ? Burns Arch. Day Book fo. 4.

248

60, 237). The Demetria inscription ΠΡ connected with ‘Tomb N. 83 Grave 4 seems to mark the last burial in the tomb (VIL. 4. 3; Fig. 299) which, according to the painted text, is thought to have occurred after the earthquake which struck Cyrenaica in the early hours of21st July, A. D. 365.” The materials for this grave and its method of construction are the same for other built graves nearby, namely that above rock-cut Grave N. 83:0 in Tomb N. 83 forecourt and Grave C on the cubiculum floor of Tomb N. 82, indicating some other burials from this disaster (Figs. 172, 191) The lining of nearby cistern N. 83-X resembles the ‘concrete compound offine crushed stone and some tile’ lining a tank in the Western Church at Apollonia, dated Christian Period IL" The purpose of the Cyrene cistern, capacity 7,351 litres (1,617 imperial gallons) is uncertain, although the evidence of the plastered forecourt N. 83-Z may indicate the presence of a structure in front of the tomb, perhaps an antechamber as represented in front of Tomb N. 84 which is a short distance away (Figs. 45, 236). The large quantity of Late Roman lamps found in Enclosure N. 83-W. may be significant, implying in conjunction with the three niches a function for this tomb other than burial in the Christian period (Figs.

172-173, 180, 339).

‘A structural sequence of events has been isolated:

Phase Archaic 1 Terrain covered with rock-cut graves (Fig. 166) Classical-Hellenistic 2 Cutting of Tomb N. 83 forecourt with two loculi, truncating earlier grave (Figs. 172, 174). 5. Cutting of Enclosures N. 83-5 and N. 83-U sarcophagi (Figs. 172, 179). 4 Removal of Enclosure N. 83:8 western sarcophagus to enlarge forecourt of Tomb N. 83 (Figs. 174, 179).

Roman 5 Destruction of loculi in Tomb N. 83 and cutting of cubiculum and arcosolia (Figs. 174, 179). 6 Cutting of formae in floor and inscriptions Ia-b (Figs. 172-173). 7 Building of Demetria grave, cutting of cistern N. 83-X and plastering of forecourt (Figs. 172, 174, 299). Rock-cur Toms N. 83 sis

IIL2.1 Historical Background Situated below Rock-cut Graves Upper Group, apparently unrecorded by Rowe. disappeared and chamber roof partly collapsed, ransacked in antiquity (Figs. 166, 179)

Facade

Π|.2. 2 Archaeological Work

The chamber floor covered by undisturbed hillwash, which had obscured evidence. 111.2.3 Structural Description

Chamber loculus tomb L. 3. 30 W. 2. 34m, its interior dressed with a claw chisel. Plain wide loculi entrances as a pair on the south, with a single entrance to the west (Figs. 174, 298). ? Goodchild (1976), 234 » Widrig (1960), 87 Fig. 3 PL XXVIII. » Cassels (1955),29 Fig. 4.

249

111.2.4 Observations The loculi are probably single-level, recalling those cut in Tomb N. 17 Loc. 2, which had enough height for possibly accommodating a large wooden coffin or bier and clusters of burial artifacts (Figs. 8, 34, 225). Rock-cur Tome N. 83-BF IIL3.1 Historical Background In 1956 prior to the discoveries made in Enclosure N. 81-BK, the tomb forecourt N. 83-BL and the four loculi belonging to Tomb N. 83-BF, half buried in hillwash, were excavated from.

west to east and numbered accordingly;" the defined area N. 83-BM above the tomb was cleared while adjoining Tomb N. 83-BF bis was left entirely unrecorded (Figs. 175-176, 178, 181). 1Π.3.2 Archaeological Work

Extracts from Day book fols. 16-18, 20 The forecourt was cleared of hillwash revealing door slabs and ‘Fragment cornice’, no discarded burial artifacts being recorded. Half-buried loculi entrances were each filled with a cone of hillwash, from which burial artifacts, mainly terracottas,

were selected for registration.“

Loc. 1 produced: ‘Fragments human skull and bones, Funerary beads (M. 559), Bronze coin (M. 561), Fragment black ware with palmette design (bolsal?), Lower half statuette (about Gem igh) (M. 563), Lower half another figure (M. 564), Top amphora, Fragments coarse pottery (Assem. LX; Fig, 344). Loc. 2 produced: ‘Cranium human skull, also various animal bones, Skull with 2 bumps, Skeleton — bow legs, Fragments small two handled black ware cup, Face of statuette, Spindle vase broken’ and two figurines (Assem. LXI; Fig. 345 nos. 565-566). Loc. 3 produced: ‘3 Skulls, Alabaster pot, Base glass bottle, Top glass bottle, 2 beads’ including iron fittings, nails and figurine fragments (Assem. LXII; Fig. 345 nos. 567-571). Loc. 4 produced: ‘Two pieces bronze perhaps mirror, Bases, necks large amphorae, Fragments large dish’, including terracotta figurines, four iron nails, unidentified bronze coin "fragments of funerary wreath, loom weight, unguentarium, small vases, small collared bowls, lid and bolsal fragment (Assem. LXIII; Fig. 345 nos. 572-597). In the defined area N. 83-BM behind the facade were: ‘1 Vase + 2 pieces of moulding, 1 frag. black ware inscribed: - MAY”. Two fragments of statue (Assem. LXVIII; Fig. 367 nos. 811-812), perhaps from statue whose arm was found in Enclosure N. 83-BK (Assem. LXX; Fig. 367 no. 821).

? Rowe I112 Fig. X. ™ RoweIl, 25 PL 7a. ? Rowe I, 30.

250

11.3.3 Structural Description Forecourt L. 6. 10 W. 4, 20m terraced into the hillside below Tomb N. 83. No indication of built enclosure walls; a step H. 0. 51m runs round three sides (Figs. 165-166 section A-B; 178). Facade finely dressed but extremely weathered (Fig. 176), cut with four equally-spaced dwarf entrances for loculi with single-panelled door slabs (Fig. 291). Entablature is built, showing simple cyma with a sloping sill, on top of which, over Loc. 3, are two sockets for stelai and acroteria at the comers. Above is the lower part of a pseudoisodomic screen laid with a string course and isodomic courses above (Figs. 177, 256, 289, 297). Interior: double-level loculi cut with a mason’s pin, the corners finished with a drove chisel (Fig. 298). Defined area behind the built screen on the southern side H. 0. 80 L. 5. 16 W. 3. 30m is bordered by a course ofnine irregular-shaped quarry-cut blocks, their inner faces showing a natural weathered surface, continuing around three sides and abutting the screen back.” The largest block at the western side is H. 0. 80 L. 2. 55 W. 0, 62m, the remainder smaller, mainly below L. 1. 30m. The completely featureless defined area mirrors the extent of the four loculi cut below, maximum L. 3. 28m. TIL3.4 Observations

To the south of Tomb N. 83-BF is the later addition Enclosure N. 83-BK, continuing on the same alignment, indicating development of a complex with the same family ownership (Figs. 178, 181, 188), further demonstrated by its isolation and also by two burial systems being employed, oculi and sarcophagi.” The striking feature on the tomb entablature is the same form of squared acroteria more usually seen on sarcophagus lids, indicating an accepted style (Figs. 222, 251, 289) The figurine discovered in Tomb N. 83-BF Loc. 2 provides a contemporary link with an identical example from Doric Tomb N. 197 Loc. 3, both facade loculus tombs and double-level with evidently a similar burial practice being used (Assem. VI, LXI; Figs. 309, 345 nos. 89, 566). The sequence of structural phases is given under Enclosure N. 83-BK (Fig. 188). Rock-cur Toms N. 83-BF Bis

IIL4.1 Historical Background The tomb is adjacent to Tomb N. 83-BF and presently used as an animal pen (Figs. 175, 178).

IIL42 Archaeological Work The tomb has been entirely cleared of hillwash, probably because of modern usage. IIL4.3 Structural Description Forecourt:

terraced into the hillside L.

4.

28 W.

3.

30m with a projection in the north-

‘western corner, the rest of the northern side being open (Fig. 178). Fagade: rock-cut and plain, showing a round-headed niche beside the entrance, above which is a sill with offset W. 0. 50m. On the sill is a built pseudoisodomic screen, the lower course of three blocks H. 0. 76 L. 2. 00 δ Rowe II, 12 Figs. X, XI PI. 6b. » These tombs missed by Cassels, as apparently obscured by hillwash and vegetation.

251 W. 0. 54m. The upper course consists of two blocks H. 0. 48 L. 1. 23 Th. 0. 54m cut back by the construction of Tomb N. 83-BF enclosure (Fig. 178). Antechamber: H. 1. 75 L. 4. 48 W. 2. 81m.

‘Two plain loculus entrances: Loc. 1 a double-level example which has been completed, Loc. 2 in the early stages of being cut in the upper level. Π|.4.4 Observations This tomb was probably intended to have four loculi, of which Loc. 1 belongs to the original

scheme, with the others to be cut later; Loc. 2 is an alteration of the original scheme as itis wider, and because of this left only enough space for one other (Fig. 228). N. 83 Rock-cur Graves Upper Group 11.5.1 Historical Background

A scatter of eleven rock-cut graves between the ancient road and Enclosure N. 83-8 (Fig. 179)," including a clutch of Graves N. 83-A to E with two smaller, unnumbered examples near Grave N. 83-A, above the later rock-cut Tomb N. 83 bis (Fig. 174). Grave N. 82-20 is close to Enclosure N. 82-23 (Figs. 166, 193), and on the same axis as the truncated grave in forecourt N. 83-Z of rock-cut Tomb N. 83 (Fig. 166, 172). Very little is published on this group but Rowe described Grave N. 83-F as still having its ‘slab lid? which has since disappeared." TIL5.2 Archaeological Work Extracts from Day book fol. 3 and Dixon fol. 12 on rock-cut graves: N. 83-A: ‘Nozzle of lamp

(M. 365),

Traces human

and animal bones (Assem. XXVII-A;

Fig. 333).

N. 83-B: ‘Part of

spindle vase (M. 367), Fragments vase (M. 368), Traces human bones’ (Assem. XXVIL-B; Fig. 333) N. 83-D: ‘Human bones, Two handled skyphos almost complete (M. 369), Complete lamp found inside above (M. 370), Base fragment jar, Fragments black ware’(Assem. XXVIL.C; Fig. 333). N. 83-C, E, F: ‘No remains.’ N. 82-20: Dixon: ‘robbed.” TII.5.5 Structural Description

The graves are terraced into the natural rock depending upon their orientations rather than the terrain. They are straight-sided and flat-bottomed, probably with a cover slab resting upon the rock surface. N. 83-A has no cover slab surviving, but has a low, rounded bolster in the interior at the southern end (Fig. 301), similar to N. 83-B. Grave N. 8D is terraced in by 0. 30m on the western side with a rim border. L. 1. 90 W. 0. 44 D. 0. 45, rim border W. 0. 20m. In Tomb N. 83 forecourt N. 83-Z is a truncated grave close to the original rock-cut surface (Fig. 172). N. 82-20

is inaccessible, being buried in post-excavation backfill. Dixon: ‘no lid. D. 98 cms." © © © ©

Rowe Il, 11, Fig. X. Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 66; Rowe I PI. 5b. Rowe Il, 11. Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 66; Rowe IL Pl. 5b.

252 TIL5.4 Observations

‘This Upper Group of graves probably continued down the hillslope to the Lower Group. (Fig. 166), separated by the cutting of Tomb N. 83 forecourt and various later enclosures, which destroyed the original scatter of rock-cut graves (Figs. 179, 180). The burial artifacts found in Grave D compare with an assemblage from a grave at Corinth, which contained a kylix like that found in Tomb S. 80 (Assem. X; Fig. 315 no. 153), which would imply that rock-cut graves are contemporary with annular built tombs of this early type in the Cyrene Necropolis (Figs. 150, 247,249).

ENCLOSURE N. 83-5

ΠΙ.6.1 Historical Background

On the higher southern side is a continuous line of five sarcophagi, with later burials behind (Fig. 179). The eastern return is formed by the lidless case of Sarcophagus N. 83-R, which appears low. The northern side is defined by a regular row of three wide, low sarcophagi, the last of which at the western end has been truncated." In line with this is a reused sarcophagus lid placed on its side to form a boundary line between extended Forecourt N. 83-Z and the enclosure, indicating that originally it was much wider (Figs. 172, 174, 180). In the north-east corner of the interior is casket Sarcophagus N. 83-I (Figs. 252, 304). At the time of excavation it would seem that most of the sarcophagi and its enclosure were buried, also concealing the small table found by Rowe against Sarcophagus N. 83-H. (Figs. 295, 304) I11.6.2 Archaeological Work Extracts from Day book fols. 3-7 In the enclosure were found: ‘Clay head and fragments of body, head, of Persephone (M. 376-M. 381), Fragment pottery cluster of grapes (M. 382), Small stone fragment (bust) statuette Persephone (M. 383), Model of column M. 384, Narrow necked jug light brown, coarse ware (M. 403), Almost complete drinking cup as previous (M. 404) (Assem. XXX, ‘XXXII; Figs. 333, 335). ‘Fragments, complete pieces pottery (M. 412-M. 418, M. 422-M. 424), Frag-

ments clay figurine (M. 419), Tubular pieces bronze handle (M. 420; Assem. XXXIV; Fig. 336). Clay head Persephone (M. 437), Fragment head of Persephone (M. 438), Clay relief of hand (M. 439), Clay relief of dove (M. 440), Fragment model of shrine (M. 441), Stone fragment body Persephone(M. 442), Clay fragment body Persephone showing necklace (M. 443), Clay head faceless Persephone? (M. 444), Clay frag. of body (M. 445-M. 447), Coin (M. 448), Small clay seated Persephone? (M. 449), Clay bust Persephone (M. 450), Stone head Persephone(M. 451) and ‘Fragments fine black ware’(Assem. XXXVII; Fig. 338). Sarcophagi: N. 83-G: ‘Fragment vase black ware (M. 372) (Assem. XXVIILB; Fig. 333). N. 83-H: ‘Began to clear round edge Sarcophagus lid. Found below: Solid limestone block’ representing small table, now untraceable (Figs. 258, 295). N. 83-] ‘Fragments rough brown pottery’. N. 83-K: ‘No remains’. N. 83-L: ‘Fragments amphora’

N. 83M: ‘Fragments rough brown pottery’. N. 83-R: ‘Traces human bones’, black-glazed lamp and kantharos, undecorated bell-mouthed oinochoai, flat-based amphora, lamp and unguentarium M. 385-400, ‘Four iron nails (M. 401), Coin bronze (M. 402), Pieces of bronze handle of mirror? Small ^ Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 67; Rowe II Pl. 5c.

253

piece glass ornament, Fragments coarse brown pottery (Assem. XXXI; Fig. 334). N. 83-AE: ‘Two fragments iron (coffin?), Fragments clay figurine, Fragments coarse light brown pottery, Aquamarine? Glass? (M. 457)", the latter connected with surface debris, also noticed in N. 83-W (Fig. 339). N. 83-AF: ‘Fragment clay figurine, Lamps’. N. 83-AD: ‘Cormpleted. No finds.’ Casket: N. 83-1 "Handle of pot (M. 371) (Assem. XXVIII-A; Fig. 333). IIL.6.3 Structural Description Enclosure L. 6. 29 W. 2. 55m has a rough, uneven surface at the eastern end, with a quarryman's channelling trench for an unfinished block L. 2. 24 W. 0. 65 D. 0. 58m, on top of which stood casket Sarcophagus N. 81-1 (Fig. 304). Sarcophagi were cut with a drove chisel and mason's pin (VIL. 17. 0). On the southern side the row of cases is of various sizes, the smallest being N. 83K, probably representing a child inhumation rather than a cremation. Low Sarcophagus N. 83-H has an offset rim on the case (Fig. 304); low Sarcophagus N. 83-G behind represents a related burial. Behind raised Sarcophagi N. 83-P, Q is a series of smaller burials N. 83-M, N and also the later cut cistern N. 83-X (Fig. 172). The eastern return of the enclosure is represented by low Sarcophagus N. 83-R which follows the slope of the hillside without being terraced into it. On the north side the return consists of a row of three cases to low Sarcophagi N. 83-AF, AE, AD. A reused lid on its side H. 0. 59 L. 2. 16 W. 1. 08m is possibly from a rock-cut sarcophagus original-

ly forming the western limit of the enclosure but destroyed when Forecourt N. 83- was extended (Figs. 172, 179).

ΠΙ.6.4 Observations

This enclosure is an example of the sarcophagus burial practice superseding rock-cut facade loculus Tomb N. 83, the same sequence having also occurred with Tomb N. 83-BF with the quartying of Enclosure N. 83-BK (Fig.

188).

A characteristic of this enclosure is that the sarcophagus

cases are close to the enclosure floor and the lids are only just above the ground surface, as demonstrated by Sarcophagus N. 83-H. This feature seems to extend into Enclosure N. 83-U and as far as N. 82-1 (Figs. 179, 193, 304). Sarcophagus N. 83-AD was originally the same length as

N. 83-AA, but when an upturned sarcophagus lid was reused as a boundary whose alignment continued across it, the case was cut back by 0. 46m; the exposed ends showing chisel marks (Figs. 179-180).

ENCLOSUREN. 83-U

11.7.1 Historical Background Enclosure is bordered by Enclosure N. 83:8 sarcophagi on the south side. At the eastern end by Sarcophagus N. 83-AC a feature which Rowe called N. 83-Y is described as ‘Slot, rock-cut, containing offering deposit. Slab lid. 122 x 62 cms’. This was probably filled with hillwash, but since excavation has been backfilled and is now undetectable (Fig. 179).

254

10.7.2 Archaeological Work

Extracts from Day book fols. 8-10 During clearance of enclosure were found bronze ‘Coin (M. 421), Small light brown juglet (M. 425), Stone faceless bust Persephone? (M. 426), Fragments red figure ware (M. 427-433), Small light brown model ampbora (M. 435), Fragments coarse brown pottery’ (Assem. XXXV; Fig. 337). Sarcophagi: N. 83-AA: ‘Clay tile with incised initial (M. 436; ‘Assem. XXXVI; Fig, 337). N. 83-AB: Small male figurine broken (M. 452), Small charm? Cupid? (M. 453’; Assem. XXXVIII; Fig. 338). N. 83-AC: ‘no remains.’ N. 83-AL: ‘Inscribed stone usRepartly cleared. Low sarcophag (M. 512’; Assem. XLVII; Fig. 341). N. 83-AQ: ‘Coin’. N.83-AP:

mains of two coarseware oinochoai and trace of glass in situ, adhering by lime concretion to interior north-east corner; registered burial artifacts ‘Coin (M. 510), Plate (M. 511), Fragments coarse pottery.’ (Assem. XLVI; Fig. 341). N. 83-AY: 'no remains.’N. 83-Y: ‘Unrobbed offering deposit under slab rock. Complete pieces pottery (M. 405-411’; Assem. XXXIII; Fig. 335). Casket: N. 83-V "Traces human bones, Fragments coarse brown pottery. Case found to be detached from ground. Nothing underneath’ 11.7.3 Structural Description Enclosure: L. 10. 00 W.

1. 35m can be entered at the north-east end, but at the correspond-

ing western end Rowe recorded a double line on his plan which may represent a built stone wall.” Beyond this, casket Sarcophagus case N. 83-V appears to be inserted, with blocking stones wedged at one end (Fig. 179). Sarcophagi: The northern side shows pair of cases to low Sarcophagi N. 83-AP, AQ with remains of another, N. 83-AY, at right angles with a broken end. The southern side shows low Sarcophagi N. 83-AA, AB, AC, cut to correspond with those forming the northern side of Enclosure N. 83-S, each having a uniform size of L. 2. 32 W. 1. 09m with a 0. 05m variation, All cases in this enclosure are crudely cut, with their rims showing weathered surfaces. ΠΙ.7.4 Observations

At the eastern end is an unregistered sloping low sarcophagus, unrecorded by Rowe, following the hillslope as does Sarcophagus N. 83-R (Fig. 179). This enclosure shows no rock-cut sarcophagi, as in N. 83-S, and the two enclosures seem to be related. Inserted block Sarcophagus N. 83-V may be a continuation of the same boundary line noticed in Enclosure N. 83-S. Rowe's description of N. 83-Y ‘offering deposit’ may indicate his first encounter with a cremation burial, comparable in size with those in Enclosure N. 81-KK (Fig. 203). Sarcophagus N. 83-AL was originally an integral part of this narrow enclosure, but is now, because of extensive recutting of Enclosure N. 83-W and the removal of its sarcophagi, the only one remaining in the northern corner of the latter enclosure (Figs. 172, 179-180).

© Rowe Il Fig. X. “ Fairman Arch. Rowe Phs. 66-67; Rowe II Pls. 5b-c

255 N. 83 Rock-cur Graves LOWER GROUP 1IL8.1 Historical Background

A scatter of twelve rock-cut graves is cut over the terrain, mainly between rock-cut enclosures (Figs. 165-166, 179-180); "another two graves N. 83-BC, BD would seem to be later, based on the symmetry of Enclosure N. 83-BK (Figs. 181, 188). Rowe recorded ‘slab lid. 231 x 90cms’ on Grave N. 83-AI which survives, and another on Grave N. 83-AR as ‘slab lid. 181 x 49cms’, now

missing." There are also several areas described by Rowe as ‘Sections of Area’ which refers to residual scatters of artifacts from past robbings of nearby graves (Fig. 180). A ‘Cinerary urn broken in pieces. Two-handled. Llight] Bluff] Contained ashes of child’ and a black-glazed ‘Frag. of kylix’ were both published as coming from N. 83-AM (sic). However, the same description appears in the Day Book under Area N. 83-AN, which contains ‘Cinerary Pi? N. 83-AW, a naturally formed hollow in a geological cleft. This confusion could have stemmed from misreading of the register, as the pieces in question are more likely to have come from N. 83-AW where a miniature vessel was found (Assem. XLVIII, XLIX; Figs. 341-342 nos. 514, 518-519).” The ‘cinerary urn’ and its

published description recall that from the Cremation Group in the Lower Enclosure N. 81-B (Assem. XCVIII; Fig. 392 nos. 1043-1044).

IIL8.2 Archaeological Work Extracts from Day book fols. 8-10 Areas: N. 83-AN: Discovery of an ‘Amphora Ht 43c Diar: 33C. Containing child's bones, Surface burial (NOT GRAVE) (M. 514’; Assem. XLVI; Fig. 341) ‘Area mostly undressed rock surface under shallow top soil containing child graves. Remains found burnt material. Also fragments human bones. Fragments burnt pottery. Fragments lamp. (M. 513). All found in pit, with Two handled bowl with decoration. Kylix broken (M. 517), ditto (smaller than above) (M. 518), Fragments pottery embedded NE corner, Small clay jug (M. 519). With the exception of amphora M. 514, these artifacts probably originated from N. 83-AW (Assem. L; Fig. 342). Probable surface finds were ‘2 large pieces decorated pottery (Ref. grapes, hair, wig etc in this Diary) (M. 525°; Assem. LIT; Fig. 342). N. 83-AV: near Sarcophagus N. 83-AY (Fig. 179), ‘Area about 40 x 40cm of burnt remains containing: Clay bead Persephone (M. 515), Small clay dish (M. 516; Asse. XLIX; Fig. 342), ‘Small stone head of Persephone (M. 526), Handle bowl (M. 527"; Assem. LIII; Fig. 342), ‘Bowl, light brown (M. 530), Small jug with red figured head, black ware (M. 531), Small light brown jug (M. 532), Bowl, light brown (M. 533), Lamp, handle broken (M. 534), Clay duck (M. 535), Clay with arm in relief (M. 536), Apollo or Zeus statuette (M. 537), Two coins (M. 538, M. 539), Roman coin (M. 541), Small clay animal? (M. 542), Small clay Apollo (M. 547), Fragments black ware, fragments large vase, tile’(Assem. LV, LVII; Figs. 343-344). N. 83-BB: ‘Lamp nozzle broken (M. 540)’ probably from a nearby grave (Assem. LVI; Fig. 343). N. 82-4: neat N. 823 Grave (Fig. 180), small aniconic head with low polos (Assem. LVIII; Fig. 344 no. 543). Graves: N. 83-Al:'Coin. (Ptolemaic) bronze (M. 505), Fragments coarse lamps with decoration — light brown ware (Christian) (M.

506-M.

507°; Assem. XLIV; Fig. 340). N. 83-AJ: ‘No remains’.

N. 83-AK: ‘Loop handle lamp (M. 504), Fragments coarse pottery (Assem. XLII; Fig. 340).

© © © » ”

Rowell, 11-12 Fig. X. Rowell, 1L Rowe II, 24 Rowe Il Fig. X. Rowe Il Fig. X.

256

N. 83-AO: ‘coveredby broken sarcophagus lid. Outside the grave found Fragment coarse brown pottery hair? from a wig? (M. 508), Fragments lamp. Coarse brown Byzantine (M. 509°; Assem. XLV; Fig. 341). N. 83-AR: ‘covered by broken Sarcophagus lid, no remains.’ N. 83-AS, AT, AU, AX: ‘no remains’. N. 83-AZ: ‘(under stone cover) Skull - good state of preservation — fragments of skeleton. Perforated mastoid in skull, Two handled cup, buff colour (M. 528), Lamp inside above (M. 529)» The annotated field drawing shows no. ‘1 cup’ on its side at eastern end with a faint outline of no. 12 lamp. Skull no. 3 is shown at western end, implying an extended burial, artifacts possibly between ankles or below feet (Assem. LIV; Figs. 180, 343)." N. 83-BC ‘Under stone cover, no remains.’ N. 83-BD ‘Under three slabs of rock: Fragments coarse light brown pottery.’ N. 82-3 Fragments coarse light brown pottery.’ IIL8.3 Structural Description

‘Area: Rock-cut surface north of Enclosures N. 83-U, N. 83-W and N. 82-1 (Figs. 180, 193) showing various natural features such as a geological fault running from N. 83-AW in a northwesterly direction towards Grave N. 81-N by Lower Enclosure N. 81-B (Figs. 166, 202). Graves: show the same cutting characteristics as before in the Upper Group, and probably had cover slabs (Fig. 301). Grave N. 83-AT is cut with a border, with the remains of its lid on the western half; this. also applies to N. 83-AR, where a ‘sarcophagus’ lid was found, having the same characteristics as N. 83-AO and N. 83-AJ which have lost their lids.” N. 83-AK has no border, showing the natural surface up to the edge of the narrow grave, its sides cut vertically for 0. 17m, below which they become irregular with rounded corners, L. 1. 75 W. 0. 42 D. 0. 40m. N. 83-AM has similar charac-

teristics, whereas N. 83-AZ is a small, narrow grave, with a rebate on three sides to receive a lid, L. 1. 12 W. 0. 28 D. 0. 24, border W. 0. 10m. N. 83-BC is small with no border, while neighbouring N. 83-BD is larger with a border; both had lids as mentioned above, missing since excavation. N. 823 with a border follows the east-west slope, rather than being terraced into the hillside.

11.8.4 Observations

This Lower Group of graves was probably part of, and contemporary with, the scatter of rock-cut graves noticed above Enclosure N. 83-S (Fig. 179). Closer to the city another random scatter of similar graves with all the same characteristics, including the orientation, stretches along the top of a bare rocky spur below the ancient road and above Tomb N. 276 with, at a lower level, terraces of rock-cut sarcophagi with acroteria, interspersed with tombs. These scatters of simple graves, cut where the terrain provides relatively level areas, seem to indicate their being early, predating the more organised cutting of sarcophagi on the steeper slopes. ENcLOSURE N. 83.

Π|.9.1 Historical Background

The enclosure, filled with hillwash in which there was a small residual scatter of artifacts from past robbings of nearby graves, is devoid of sarcophagi, barring Sarcophagus N. 83-AL in the eastern corner (Fig. 180)

® Fairman Arch. Rowe Phs. 8, 1; Rowe Arch. Ph. 46; Rowe II Pls. 12c,13a. ? Rowe Il, 11 » Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 66; Rowe II PL 5b.

257 Π|.9.2 Archaeological Work

Extracts from Day book fols. 6-8 ‘Marble fragment frieze (M. 454), Three coins (M. 455-M. 456, M. 458), Head Persephone (terracotta) (M. 459"; Assem. XXXIX; Fig. 339), ‘Fragments Byzantine lamps — traces inscription coarse clay (M. 461-M. 480) (Assem. XL; Fig. 339), ‘Frieze marble (M. 482), Part spindle vase (M. 483), Part tear bottle glass (M. 484), Rough coarse clay fragments lamps (M. 485-M. 492), Marble with letters (Al) (M. 493), Black ware lamp (M. 494), Small clay lamp (M. 495), Clay bead Persephone (M. 496), Small clay plate (M. 497), Ornament coffin (bronze) (M. 498), Small broken spindle vase (M. 499-502), Fragments black wares, Small light brown clay pot, Small broken light brown vase, Fragments red clay pottery, Part marble cornice (Assem. XL Fig. 340).” Several Late Roman lamps were also found as a scatter over rock-cut sarcophagi in Enclosure N. 83-8, which were ‘Between AE-AB Rough clay lamp (M. 460); Between AA-AD Flower pot? (M. 481)’and may also include M. 457 (Assem. XL; Fig. 339). 111.9.3 Structural Description Rectangular enclosure: L. 7. 60 W. 4. 78m without any immediately surrounding sarcophagi, its uneven floor cut down by 0. 98m from the natural rock surface in the south-western corner. On the eastern side are the exposed ends of Sarcophagi N. 83-AA, N. 83-AD and block sarcophagus case N. 83-V (Fig. 179). In the south-eastern corner are the remains of the built boundary wall to Tomb N. 83 forecourt (Figs. 172, 180) with rock-cut steps leading up to it.” The south-western corner represents the access point into Enclosure N. 82-24 (Fig. 193). The western boundary shows the slope of the hillside and its original weathered surface. The northern boundary exists only as a cut edge and low Sarcophagus N. 83-AL which has been cleared and is an integral part of Enclosure N. 83-U (Fig. 179)" TII 9.4 Observations

Tt is obvious that either Enclosure N. 83-W was a shallow quarry, or that it was deliberately cleared of its then ancient sarcophagi to give it another more important role, as Sarcophagus N. 83-AL was originally connected with Enclosure N. 83-U which continued westwards into it, probably to form an access point, turning to run south at right-angles to Tomb N. 83 forecourt (Figs. 166, 179-180). This access was truncated, being replaced by rock-cut steps upon the later cutting of the enclosure, which contained a concentration of twenty-one unpublished Late Roman Byzantine lamps (Fig. 339 nos. 460-480). These may be connected with lamp niches in Tomb N. 83 cubiculum for the Christian veneration of Demetria’s grave (Fig. 173). Also from this period may belong a stray bronze coin found in Area N. 83-AV (Fig. 344 no. 541).

? Rowe Arch. Ph. 185. % Rowe Il,24. ® Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 17; Rowe I Pl. 15a. ® Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 66; RoweII Pl. 5b.

258 ENCLOSURE N. 83-ΒΚ.

TII.10.1 Historical Background

Enclosure cut deep into the hillslope (Fig. 181) forming what Rowe called a ‘concealed pit measuring 21 feet square’ (6. 40m), which took nine days to clear from its discovery on 23rd July. "Its upper debris consisted of undisturbed alternate layers of soil and quarry chips’. The enclosure contained ‘four huge sarcophagi’ Rowe's (1-4), ‘each with its lid still in the original position. The horizontal joint between the case and lid was sealed on the outside by a rather narrow strip of plaster, which fell off as soon as it was exposed... There were the remains of twelve skeletons ofadults... later burials were added to the original ones’? At this time the enclosure was photographed by the “Antiquities Department and a ycar later by the Deutsches Archiologisches Institut.

This is the only printed description of the number of skeletal remains and contents of the sarcophagi interiors. Ibrahim Lakhwany, who entered the sarcophagi for Rowe to recover the artifacts, confirmed on 4th April 1995 that the skeletal remains were returned to their respective graves. The final publication describes the enclosure infilling as ‘alternate layers of small stones and debris’ (Fig. 182).* Some artifacts from the four sarcophagi were placed on display in the newly-refurbished Cyrene Museum, which may have included the missing bronze tweezers mentioned below.” In February 1995 the lids of Sarcophagi N. 83-BI and N. 83-BJ were smashed, probably at night, reportedly by the pickaxes of European present-day grave-robbers, shortly after being published in colour by Professor Bacchielli.? 1Π.10.2 Archaeological Work

Extracts from Day book fols. 11-16 On July 23rd this enclosure area was referred to at first as N. 83-BB, from which came: ‘Two marble fragments of statue (M. 544-545), Small clay head of figurine (M. 546), Fragment of bowl ~ Persian? (M. 547), Fragment bowl with incised pattern.’ The following day the tops of Sarcophagi N. 83-BG and BH were reached ‘Under 1?m rubble and fine sand (Fig. 182), exposing the tiplines of quarryman’s deposited stone chippings running down into the enclosure. There followed clearance of the western part, revealing the lid of Sarcophagus N. 83-BI (Fig. 183). The extent of the enclosure was revealed and five days later N. 83-BJ was uncovered (Fig. 185). On July 28th the floor was reached ‘Depth 3. 50m’. Final clearance produced further fragments apparently from a draped statue: ‘Small clay vase (M. 550), Fragment red figure ware amphora (M. 551), Pottery fragment with disc projections (M. 552), Fragment marble with inscription (M. 553), Miscellaneous fragments marble (M. 554), Fragments marble including piece of drapery from statue (M. 555), Fragments marble statue (shoulder) (M. 556) (and drapery), Fragments large amphorae and other large clay pots (M. 557), Small piece aquamarine found below north projection sarco lidBI (M. 558), Fragment base black ware bowl, Fragment base coarse ware amphora? Small clay offering bowl. Fragments pottery » ^^ © © ©

Rowe (1956b),5. Ant. Dept. Cyr.Ph. 8834 F. 3951 (dated 1 Aug. 1956); Rowe II PL 6a-. Cyr. Mus. Ph. 5951; Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 78; Rowe Il, 12n. 1, 25 Figs. X-XII Pls. 6ab. Thom (1994), 109. Bacchielli (1994), 103,

259 with Inscription (597) number duplicated with that of artifact from Tomb N. 83-BF Loc. 4. Probable number is M. 598, SARCOPHAGUS N. 83-BI (ROWE's PROVISIONAL NO. 1) Day book fol. 22 ‘August 6 BI [1]’Provisional nos. 200-219 (M. 559-M. 627) = 28 total artifacts, 1 Skeleton’ (Assem. LXIV;

= 20; ‘Objects as per register Figs. 183-184, 346-348).

Skeleton A Only the lower part, showing a flexed burial, legs bent and dislodged skull in area of pelvic girdle. Artifacts were distributed in two clutches, one at south-east corner and another around hips where object no. 200 was inverted, perhaps representing black-glazed bolsal M. 600 which shows patch of iron corrosion products Dia. 0. 005m on inside rim indicating presence of a metallic object, probably one of the unpublished items M. 625-627. Evidence of lime concretion on artifacts indicates that red-painted pelike M. 615 lay on its side, as did straight-sided olpe M. 612 which contained mollusca concentration iv and vi with burial (Figs. 347, 362). No lime concretion exists on olpe M. 609 which contained terra rossa, suggesting that soil had entered the grave. Unfortunately it is impossible to discern from the field drawing where model mirrors M. 623-624 were positioned as they are not annotated. Lekanis lid M. 616 lacks its case, which is probably one of the unpublished items M. 617-622, closely resembling M. 1143 (Fig. 404). Palmette stamp used on floor of smaller black-glazed bolsal M. 599 matches exactly that on another, M. 689 found in Sarcophagus N. 83-BH. SARCOPHAGUS N. 83-BG (ROWE's PROVISIONAL NO. 2)

Day book fol. 19 ‘August 5th BG [2] Provisional nos. 1-52 = 52; ‘51 objects plus miscellaneous (52) Objects as per Object Register (M. 628-M. 676) = 48, (671A) (6728) (673C) + 3 handles 4.8.0, (661A) + 1 lid A = 52 total artifacts, Remains three sbeletons (Assem. LXV; Figs. 182, 184, 348-353) Unique five seconds of 8mm film footage shows burials in eastern part of sarcophagus interior (video events 10:48:21 to 10:53:03), followed by 45 seconds of footage taken during its clearance (video events 11:00:03 to 12:34:19), on which, together with the field drawing, the following descriptions are based. Quantity of skeletons involved recognised by four human skulls visible in film, Skeleton A Extended burial, leg bones, pelvic girdle and rib cage indicated in field drawing, Skull 3 resting on its side facing south-east. Burial artifacts show small bolsal no. :30 (M. 655) resting against inside of right tibia just above ankle, handles parallel to leg bone. On outside of leg is upper part of large black-glazed hydria no. '29', the mouth facing east. At foot of skeleton and at right angles to it, complete red-painted amphora no. 36 (M. 669) lies on its side. Left tibia is pushed inwards, probably by weight of large knobbed amphora no. ‘24’ on outer side of leg, the mouth overlooking the left foot. Between these amphorae is small collared bowl M. 640 or M. 641. Annotation ‘metal bronze’ at chest level, the only indication of metal artifacts being present which might represent one of the unpublished objects M. 670-676. Skeleton B Extended burial, its leg bones in north-eastern comer of grave, pelvic girdle and rib cage, Skull 4, its missing parietal bone suggesting a young person, upside-down touching Skull 3. By right foot is Skull 1 from Skeleton D. Tucked under eastern side of large, cracked knobbed

260

amphora no. ‘24’, identical to M. 745 from Sarcophagus N. 83-BJ, and at same angle is blackglazed kalpis no. 32'(M. 664), shoulder handle pointing upwards. These rest across femurs, the amphora causing collapse of pelvic girdle on its western side. Skeleton C Extended burial, Skull 2 resting upside-down in southern corner seems to represent existence of another skeleton tucked between Skeleton A and case wall which is covered by burial artifacts nos. ‘1-3? deposited with the latter. Skeleton D Probably an extended burial, only Skull 1 visible, resting on its side facing south indicating presence of a body underneath Skeletons A and B, laid the other way round. Small lid M. 647 could belong to kantharos goblet M. 660. No bronze or iron objects are known from this sarcophagus, and no traces of corrosion products have been identified to indicate their existence. SARCOPHAGUS N. 83-BH (ROWE'S PROVISIONAL NO. 3)

Day book fol. 20 ‘August 5th BH [3]'Provisional nos. 100-164 = 65; ‘65 objects (+ 3 small

coins) = (M. 739-741). Objects as per register (M. 677-M. 744) = 67’ (68) total artifacts, Remains three skeletons’(Assem. LXVI; Figs. 182, 185-187, 353-360)

Skeleton A Recognisable extended burial lying diagonally showing leg bones, pelvic girdle, rib cage and Skull 1 to the north-west. The main group of burial artifacts lay in the northern corner by this skeleton. Bolsal no. ‘101° may represent M. 688 or M. 689 between the legs, recalling the same positioning of bolsal M. 655 in N. 83-BG (Fig. 350). To the side of the torso lay large amphora no. ‘100’ (M. 677), its mouth pointing south-east. Skeleton B Known only by Skull 2 resting by pelvic girdle of Skeleton A. Skeleton C Disarticulated skeleton, Skull 3 lies at south-eastern end of grave with two separate fragments of jaw and a small clutch of vessels in eastern corner. Red figured pelike M. 680, judging from its spalling, may have been standing upright. Lid of black-glazed pelike M. 681 was found, according to Rowe, in N. 83-B] (III.10.4). Evidence of lime concretion on artifacts shows that small amphora M. 682 was lying neck up at 45° with part of one handle buried, the same applying to lid M. 725. Iron rod or chisel M. 684 bis found adhering to footring of black glazed olpe M. 684, suggesting the latter was lying on its side close to unguentarium M. 716 and spheriform olpe M. 710 which both show iron stains on one side, implying that these objects lay in situ on the burial surface. Bronze mirror M. 735 has a small piece of iron adhering on one side, Lekanis lid M. 696 has no case, which may be one of the unpublished items Palmette stamp used on floor of black-glazed bolsal M. 689 matches exactly that on another, M. 599 found in N. 83:81. The coins M. 739-741 are datable to 308-277 B. C. (Fig. 360). ‘SARCOPHAGUS N. 83-BJ (ROWE’S PROVISIONAL NO. 4) Day book

fol. 23 ‘Aug

7’ BJ (4) Provisional

nos.

300-351

=

52; ‘found 2 small bronze

coins’ (M. 800-801). Objects as per register (M. 745-805) = 60" total artifacts. Socket evidence on sarcophagus lid for block and slab stelai implies that at least three inhumations were present as the skulls of three are shown in the lower grave, annotated as ‘3’, changed to ‘4’ and finally ‘5 skulls’ (Assem.

LXVII; Figs. 185, 187, 361-366).

261 Skeletons A-C and their Skulls 1-3 shown in the field drawing are all at the northern half of the lower grave with disarticulated pelvic and limb bones.

Skeletons D-E are not shown, and it must be assumed that they were also found in the lower grave, together with over 30 burial artifacts, with large amphora no. “300᾽ (M. 745) lying centrally lengthwise with the mouth facing southwards In large amphora M. 745 was a lime-encrusted mollusca concentration,* also found in olpe M. 790, together with terra rossa (Figs. 362, 366). Pelike M. 750 showed lime concretion which proved that the vessel had lain horizontally. Model askos M. 770 has no model counterpart in known lamps; bronze strigil M. 798 was found complete. Lid M. 768 to lidded pelike M. 681 supposedly came from adjoining Sarcophagus N. 83-BH as mentioned above (III.10.4). The silver coins M. 800-801 are datable to 475-375 B. C. (Fig. 366). Lentered the sarcophagus on 4th April 1995 and found redeposited skeletal remains and a recent mollusca concentration (Fig. 362) and made the following observations on the skulls (iii), which may represent two of the five skeletons Rowe claimed were present: i frontal bone showing upper jaw with one premolar extremely worn, showing caries. i teeth chain complete. Upper jaw: shows wear on cusps of molars. Lower jaw: molar cusps and incisors very flattened. TIL10.3 Structural Description Enclosure N. 83-BK square, L. 6. 50 W.

6. 15 D. 3. 65, 0. 70m, with well-dressed sides, an

offset of W. 0. 15m behind Sarcophagus N. 83-BI continuing as far as the case of Sarcophagus N. 83-BG which truncates it; a small flight of steps are quarry-cut in the western corner opposite sarcophagus blank H. 0. 78 L. 2. 52 W. 1. 30m in the northern corner. The central floor area 1.4.88 W. 2. 75m is uneven, showing the marks where rows of ashlar blocks, W. 0. 60m, have been removed, now much weathered. Two large low rock-cut Sarcophagi N. 83-BI, N. 83-BJ stand on either side, with two raised rock-cut Sarcophagi N. 83-BG, N. 83-BH at the southern end (Figs. 181,

183, 185-186). Sarcophagi:

N. 83-BI, BJ: Low

sarcophagi, the latter with a small interior

upper grave and a smaller lower grave placed at one end L. 1.70 W. 0. 48 D. 0. 32m. The lid is without lever holes, and is larger than the grave size, with square and rectangular sockets on the plinth (Figs. 183, 185, 257, 297, 304). Ν. 83-BG, BH: Raised sarcophagi, the latter with a square socket on the plinth, its lid showing lever holes at each end (Figs.

182, 186, 297, 305).

111.10.4 Observations

The lid M. 768 from Sarcophagus N. 83-BJ belonging to lidded pelike M. 681 from N. 83-BH was probably transposed during cleaning, a fundamental weakness observed by Dixon,” who describes objects being placed in the wrong baskets. Alternatively, the provisional number may have been misread or duplicated, as demonstrated on the field drawing, where 159 occurs twice and 160 has been placed by mistake with N. 83-BG. The burial artifacts from four sarcophagi amounted to 208 items M. 599-801, of which 166 items were classified in the Manchester Guardian. Their registration numbers have been included here where it has been possible to Seddon (1994), 149-156 Figs. 1.3. © Fairman Arch. Rowe Phs. 41, 44; RoweII, 16-17 Pls. 11a, 12a; Thorn (1994), 105. ^^ Rowe (1956b), 5.

262

identify them, based on the final published descriptions; only 155 items were finally listed." Those which could not be identified are given at the end of Rowe's classification, using his published nomenclature. i

Sixteen two-bandled drinking bowls of the skyphos type 599-600, 645, 653-657, 686-687, 689, 691,

ii

Fourteen jugs of the oinochoe type for pouring wine 658-659, 756-762 (five missing)

752-755 Unpub. 688

iii iv ν΄ vi

Sixteen two-bandled amphorae 615, 668-669, 677, 682, 745, 750-751, N. 83-BG two unpub. (six missing) Tuo three-bandled amphorae 664-(665) Sixteen lids for amphorae 616, 642-643, 696, 781 (eleven missing) Eight slim jugs of lekythos type for pouring oil slowly 633-634, 703-704, 789-790 (two missing)

vii viii

Four jugs 666, 705, 788-788A Twenty-nine juglets 609-612, 628-629, 631-632, 683-685, 706-714, 717, 785-787, 792-794, 796 Un-

pub. 630

ix x xi xii xiii xiv xv — xvi

Twenty small dishes 603-608, 636-637, 638-640, 720, 722-725 Unpub. 602 (three missing) Nineteen lamps 613-614, 648-652, 697-702, 771-776 Seven bowls 694-695, 727-728, 784 (two missing) Kylix or two-handled shallow drinking cup (unidentified) Spindle vases 635, 715-716,769 Pyxis 661-661A Broken red-figured pelike 680 Pyxis with head of Medusa 770 (Rowe IL Pl. 40a-b in reverse)

xvii

Five silver coins 739-741, 800-801

à Two silver mirrors 623-624 Two bronze mirrors 135-136. xx Pair of bronze tweezers (799) xd Unbroken bronze strigil 198 xxi Artificial wreaths 744

Unidentified: cups 601, 779, vase 646, small lid 647, vase and lid 662-663, pelike and lid 681, 768, skyphos 691, amphora 763, unguent pot 767, small jug 791, small bowls 660, 692-693, 764-766, 782-783, small dish 641, dishes 732-733

The Phase 1 loculus Tomb N. 83-BF, extended in Phase 2 with Enclosure N. 83-BK, gives a very clear sequence of development which has also occurred in Enclosure N. 83-S, where sarcophagus burials supersede those of loculus tombs (Fig. 188). The steps may represent the size of the quartied blocks removed from the enclosure L. 1. 00 W. 0. 45 Th. 0. 43m, the offset being the only indication that this enclosure was extended in Phase 3 to accommodate the two raised Sarcophagi N. 83-BG, BH. The plinth sockets of Sarcophagi N. 83-BH, BJ indicate that a marble block stele and a limestone slab stele, referred to by Rowe as ‘finials’,® had been removed prior to Enclosure N. 83-BK being infilled with quarry chippings (Figs. 256-257, 305). In the Lower Group of graves are two, N. 83-BC, BD, which by their symmetry with the southern border of the enclosure may be related to it (Fig. 180). The volume of quarry chippings filling the enclosure probably originated from nearby Tomb N. 83, which has approximately the same cubic capacity (Fig. 172). The marble fragments recorded as being found among the debris possibly represent an iconic half-figure and its statue base which had to be smashed for easy removal, the unfound head © Fairman Arch. Rowe Phs. 31-44; Rowe II, 14, 17, 22, 26, 32 Pls. 8a-c, 9a-c, 10a-c, 11a-b, 12a, 40a-b. Rowe (1956b), 5.

263

completely unknown, and may include another part, M. 811 and other fragments found as surface debris in the adjoining defined area N. 83-BM above Tomb N. 83-BF (Fig. 188). The miscellaneous artifacts were probably those from the original Hellenistic loculus burials in Tomb N. 83 (Assem. LXVIII, Fig. 367).° SARCOPHAGUS Group N. 83-BN-BU

ΠΠ.11.1 Historical Background

On discovery of Enclosure N. 83-BK excavation of this group was deferred until 1957, although nearby rock-cut Grave N. 83-BE was cleared (Fig. 188).” Two sarcophagi N. 83-BO, BR through lack of the Register may have contained burial artifacts, as may N. 83-BQ which possibly represents a cremation. ΠΙ.11.2 Archaeological Work Extracts from Dixon fol. 9 Areas: N. 83-BN: Black figured skyphos, terracotta quince, rooster, two crushed, relief-decorated conical vessels, a number of coarseware vessels and fragment of

marble stele, indicating debris from nearby robbed graves (Assem. LXXII; Fig. 369 nos. 826-827,

835, 837, 839). N. 83-BU: Described by Rowe as: ‘Offering deposit in surface debris’, containing small collared bowl, oinochoe and damaged spheriform oinochoe (Assem. LXXIII; Fig. 370 nos.

841-843).

Sarcophagi: N. 82-BE: Under sarcophagus type lid (horns, pitched roof etc. ) No remains." N. 83-BO: apparently robbed, no artifacts published. Unprovenanced group of complete vessels could originate from this (Assem. LXXIX; Fig. 375). N. 83-BP: ‘frags. of bones, some burnt. Only two burial artifacts registered (Assem. LXXX; Fig. 375). N. 83-BR: Probably a cremation, no artifacts published. Unprovenanced group of complete vessels could originate from this (Assem. LXXIX; Fig. 375). N. 83-BS: ‘Disturbed bodies (5) not in position. Some burnt bones. Large collection of complete artifacts and possibly some others (Assem. LXXVIII; Figs. 373-374). N. 83-BT:

Burial artifacts covered by hillwash which had entered the grave, keeping them in situ,” including bronze strigil, black-glazed ‘skyphos’, lamp and numerous coarsewares, some of which are damaged (Assem. LXXVI; Figs. 188, 371 nos. 860-862). Cremation N. 83-BQ: Described by Rowe as: ‘Offering deposit in surface debris” from which came complete narrow-necked jug and two model skyphoid cups (Assem. LXXT; Fig. 368 nos. 823-825).

© ? # 5. ?

Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 66; Rowe II Fig. X PL 5b. Rowe Il Figs. X, XIV PI. 22. Burns Arch. Day book fol. 11. Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 94; Rowe II Pl. 25c. Rowe Il, 12.

264

ΠΙ.11.3 Structural Description

Extracts from Dixon fol. 9 Sarcophagi: N. 83-BE: A low rock-cut case which may be connected with this group. Lid H. 0.35 L. 1. 20 W. 0. 60m. Grave L. 1. 00 W. 0. 40 D. -. N. 83-BO: "robber's hole in N. side. depth of rock-cut case: 28. Ooms. No Pedestal on lid (Fig. 305). N. 83-BP: variant, its plinth off-centre (Fig. 297). ‘Robber’s hole in N. side, E. end. Pedestal on 1 side S.) only. Row of 6 holes on N. side of lid (for securing metal plaque?). Depth of rock-cut case: 43 ons. (Fig. 305). N. 83-BR: socket on the plinth. ‘N. -E. corner broken. depth of rock-cut case: 31cms.’ Interior L. 0. 75 W. 0. 32m (Figs. 297, 305). N. 83-BS: ‘No Pedestal on lid or acroteria.

Very weathered inscription on N. edge of lid. (VIL. 11. 3) ‘Hole in N. side of lid. depth of rock-cut case: 40 cms,’ Interior L. 1.74 W. 0. 53m (Fig. 305). N. 83-BT: ‘N. side broken with the exception of the N. -E. corner (child's grave)’. Interior L. 0. 68 W. 0. 33 D. 0. 30m, its lid now missing Cremation N. 83-BQ: ‘Offering deposit’ on the south-eastern side of Sarcophagus N. 83-BP, now inaccessible (Fig. 188). TIL11.4 Observations

This group may initially have represented an open plot with low sarcophagus burials terraced into the hillside, probably intended to be subsequently enclosed in a burial plot or peribolos such as the example near Tomb N. 124 below El Mawy land (Fig. 246). The low nature of these sarcophagi recalls the nearby Enclosure N. 83-U, which may be contemporary (Fig. 179). In the group are Sarcophagi N. 83-BR, N. 83-BT which compare in size with those used for cremation

burials (Figs. 252, 305), rather than infant inhumation burials; these are unknown, other than the example referred to by Norton which must be regarded as dubious (I. 4. 1 March report). The cremation N. 83-BQ is identified by comparison with N. 81-AD, which shows the types of vessels associated with a cremation (Fig. 203). Rowe’s N. 83-BU: the published description matches that of N. 83-BQ," but is given by Dixon as ‘surface deposit’ and is marked as an area in front of N. 83-BS.” Rowe seems to have registered his surface finds before his sarcophagi burial assemblages. A group of unpublished artifacts for which there is no location may belong to the burial assemblages of Sarcophagi N. 83-BO, N. 83-BR (Assem. LXXIX; Fig. 375). The lamp fragment M. 897 is unlikely to have originated from these sarcophagi, judging by its condition, and is more likely to be an artifact from Tomb N. 82 forecourt debris (Fig. 190). ROCK-CUT TOMB N. 82 AREA

Rock-cur Toms N. 82 111.12.1 Historical Background

This tomb was half-buried in hillwash when first recorded by Cassels in 1953,’ subsequently

cleared by Rowe in 1957, finding ‘a floor of an Arab house’ over the forecourt (Figs. 190-191)" Dixon described the cubiculum: ‘tops of walls inside curve inwards’ with ‘door socket on right of ™ ® ™ 7.

Rowe Il, 12. Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 90; Rowe ITP. 22a Cassels (1955), 27 Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 108; Rowe II, 9 Fig. XIV Pl. 41a.

265 entrance; to the left, holes for bolts’ and several ‘lamp niches in walls’ but omitted describing Grave D^

"Arcosolium A. Arcosolium B. Grave C.

Thick layer of heavy earth produced by rain. grave robbed. frags. of bone. depth of rock-cut case: 58. Ocms. Depth of occupation debris: 47ems. Contents nil. layer of whitish dust on top -- remains of fire? depth: 76 cms. Depth of habitation deposit: 6dcms. Robbed. depth (from ledge in wall): 80. Ocms.’ Cover slab described as ‘misplaced slab’ across grave.

TII.12.2 Archaeological Work

The forecourt contained debris of robbed Hellenistic and early Roman burial artifacts funeral busts (Assem. LXXIV, LXXVI; Figs. 370, 372 nos. 848, 868A),” aniconic half-figure fragments and broken burial artifacts (Assem. LXXXI, XC; Figs. 376, 381 nos. 912-915). Sarcophagus lid N. 82-7 with weathered rectangular socket on plinth probably belonged to Sarcophagus N. 82-19 (Figs. 190, 193). The cubiculum was full of compacted hillwash before being cleared down to the chamber floor, revealing a lamp fragment (Asem, XCIII; Fig. 384 no. 995). 1IL12.5 Structural Description

Forecourt roughly square L. 7. 10 W. 6. 90m. It appears like a deep quarry with irregular

sides, with a course of reused ashlarwork on the south-western side, interpreted as belonging to an ‘Arab house’ In the northern corner, a rock-cut core supporting a partly built flight of steps H. 1.55 L. 1. 24m.? The edge of the quarry's south-western boundary shows four stepped sills suitable for the foundations of an isodomic boundary wall (Fig. 190). Fagade H. 4. 00 L. 4. 10m shows the marks of ashlar blocks being removed when it was a quarry. Above the entrance are the cases to Sarcophagi N. 82-18, N. 82-19 from the original Enclosure N. 82-24, with a gap between representing the access for Enclosure N. 82-23 (Figs. 189, 193). Cubiculum roughly rectangular, H. 3. 30 L. 4. 94-5. 60 W. 5. 26-5. 44m. Two steps, bordered by rectangular blocks H. 0. 40 L. 1. 23 W. 0. 46m, lead down to a rough-hewn floor, around which on two sides runs a step H. 0. 34 W. 0, 25m which has been incorporated into Graves C, D. Two barrel-vaulted arcosolia were cut asymmetrically, with the ceiling finely dressed with a drove chisel and the walls dressed with a mason’s pin (Fig. 191). TIL12.4 Observations

It is likely that the deep quarry which eventually formed the tomb forecourt destroyed the north-western part of Enclosure N. 82-24, including several sarcophagi, but Sarcophagi N. 82-18, N. 82-19 were retained as part of the facade of Tomb N. 82 (Fig. 189). Rowe’s niche in the forecourt may represent the truncated side of a sarcophagus case (Fig. 193). This deep quarry may ? 7 ? " © © ™

Rowe II Fig. XIV inset. Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 149; Rowe I1, 22 Pl. 42b. Rowe Il Fig. XIVPL 41b. Rowe II Pl Alc. Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 108; Rowe IT, 9 Fig. XIV,Pl. 41a. Rowe II Pl 41b. Rowe Il Fig. XIV.

266

also have completely destroyed another enclosure between N. 82-24 and N. 82-1, the latter being the north-western extent of these enclosures. As there are no suitable rock-cut tombs in the immediate vicinity, a toppled aniconic half-figure M. 912-915 which has laminated may have come from a sarcophagus lid, as indicated by Rowe's Enclosures N. 81-AN and N. 82-23 above (Figs. 193, 255). The arrangement of Arcosolia A and B inside the tomb is similar to those in Tomb N. 5 (Figs. 75, 80, 237). The material used to build Graves C and D in the cubiculum corresponds with that used for Tomb N. 83 Grave 4, implying a similar hurried interment (Fig. 299). N. 82-23 ENCLOSURE 111.13.1 Historical Background Enclosure: Dixon’s personal notes are the only source of information available on the extent

of clearance of the surrounding partially exposed sarcophagi, as there are no detailed published

descriptions or views of this area (Figs. 192-193). The enclosure, being close to the ancient road, had been extensively robbed, and on its floor were discovered a stele ‘left on site’ because of its broken, laminated condition and a smaller broken slab stele which was saved and housed in the

‘ante room’, referring to a small museum storeroom on the ground floor of the Sculpture Gallery (Assem. CXI; Fig. 402 nos. 1122, 1125). As part of Rowe's contract, the enclosure was backfilled

with spoil after excavation; it was also landscaped into a garden surrounded by drystone walls built on top of the sarcophagi, where two stepped bases M. 1123-1124 also from the enclosure,

were later repositioned.”

TII.13.2 Archaeological Work

The enclosure is recorded in two photographs; the tidemark from hillwash left on the cases suggests that the entire enclosure was filled, but the tops of the lidless cases were exposed. The lid of Sarcophagus N. 82-15 (Fig. 192) was found face down on the enclosure floor, possibly in association with the stelai and stepped bases (Assem. CXT; Fig. 402 nos. 1123-1124). The debris also contained: fragment of aniconic half-figure with mantle,” lamp, unguentarium, badly damaged funeral bust and other miscellaneous artifacts (Assem. CIX, CXIIT, Figs. 400-402 nos. 1109-1110, 1115, 1129). Dixon's notes are the only record which give an indication that five of the sarcopha-

gus cases were cleared, from which finds are unknown, those with lids remaining unopened (Fig 193)

1.133 Structural Description Extracts from Dixon fols. 11-12 Enclosure: rectangular L. 6. 75 W. 2. 90m approx, deep with a well-dressed rock-cut floor. A series of circular holes is cut around three sides against the

step, immediately below Sarcophagi N. 82-14 and N. 82-15, and in a similar relative position for

© % © = ©

Rovell, 9 Fig. XIV. Fairman Arch. Rowe Phs. 135-126. RoweIl,2,24PL.C. Dixon Arch. Phs. 139-140. Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 132; Rowe II Pl 42a.

267 Sarcophagi N. 82-13 and N. 82-22 (Fig.

192). Another next to Sarcophagus N. 82-21 has a square

cover slab for a small cremation receptacle (Fig. 305).” The surrounding sarcophagi are of various sizes, their cases defined by a narrow vertical drafted edge continuing from a quarryman’s channelling trench above; the enclosure is entered by a gap between the cases of Sarcophagi N. 82-22 and Ν. 82-21 Sarcophagi: N. 82-13: lid unrecorded” ‘lid broken in half. D. 68. Ocms.’N. 82-14: ‘D. 66. Ooms. Robbed.’Lid missing. N. 82-15: ‘D. 66. Ocms. Robbed.’Lid with lever hole found in the enclosure face down. N. 82-16: ‘not cleared.’ Lid in situ, shows lifting bosses at each end. N. 82-17: ‘not cleared.’ Lid in situ. N. 82-21: ‘no lid. D. 58. Ocms. Robbed.’ N. 82-22: ‘no lid. D. 49. Ocms. Robbed.’ N. 82-12: ‘not cleared.’ Lid in situ, small sockets on the plinth (Fig. 297).

III.13.4 Observations

The small holes noticed in the enclosure floor against the sarcophagi were not recognised in other enclosures cleared by Rowe, but may represent ducts (Fig. 193). One which differs by having a square cover slab may represent a cremation receptacle (Fig. 227, 262). The finding of a sarcophagus lid, block stelai and stepped bases M. 1122-1125 on the floor were recorded on a site label, but the published description ‘From above a cinerary urn burial which had been removed (Belongs to M. 1123. ) is not possible, as this would have caused a large hole in the enclosure floor for the burial, which is not on the plan or on the two known photographs (Figs. 192, 258). ENCLOSURE N. 82-24 ABOVE Tom N. 82 Π|.14.1 Historical Background

This enclosure is immediately north-west of Enclosure N. 82-23, apparently cut by a deep quarry eventually forming forecourt of Tomb N. 82 which destroyed most of it (Fig. 193) 111.14.2 Archaeological Work

The extent of this enclosure's clearance is only known from Dixon's notes, giving the interior depths of sarcophagus cases and a reference to their being robbed. There are no known published burial artifacts, which may indicate insignificant fragments were found. Dixon records that five sarcophagus cases were cleared, with another, N. 82-18, through the daunting weight of the lid, remaining unopened immediately above Tomb N. 82 facade (Fig. 189) ΠΠ.14.3 Structural Description

Extracts from Dixon fols, 11-12 Surrounded by rock-cut sarcophagi on two sides only, with a return for a third side L. 2. 44 W. 2. 41m. The floor has a well-dressed surface, and on the south-eastern side a step running in front of Sarcophagus N. 82-19 has been removed from Sar® Fairman Arch. Rowe Phs. 145-146; Rowe Il Fig. XIV Pls. 19c-d. ® Rowe Il, 9 Fig. IX. ® RoweΠ 24; Dixon Arch. Phs. 139-140.

268

cophagus N. 82-18 by the deep quarry. A gap between these two sarcophagi leads into Enclosure N. 82-23 (Fig. 193). At the eastern corner is a combined pair of smaller Sarcophagi N. 82-11 and N. 82-10 for child inhumations.” The north-eastern side is represented by Sarcophagus N. 82-9 with a quarryman’s channelling trench cut against its case; a portion of ashlar from the floor remains in situ, Sarcophagus N. 82-8, by which is a gap with a slightly raised step overlooking Enclosure N. 83-W, represents the northern return (Figs. 180, 193). The quarry forecourt to rockcut Tomb N. 82 encroaches on the south-western corner of Enclosure N. 82-24 (Figs. 189-190, 193).

N. 82-8: ‘no lid. D. 46. Ocms. Robbed.’ N, 82-9: ‘lid broken in half. D. 48. Ocms. |. 82-10: ‘Slot grave (child's), no lid. D. 40. Ocms. Robbed.’ N. 82-11: ‘Slot grave (child's), no lid. D. 43. Ocms. Robbed.’ N. 82-19: ‘no lid. D. 59. Ooms. Robbed.’ A lid probably from N. 82-7 was found in Tomb N. 82 forecourt (Fig. 190).* N. 82-18: ‘Sarcophagus.’ Lid in situ. III.14.4 Observations

‘The enclosure floor shows no evidence of small cut holes by the side of the sarcophagi, as noticed in adjoining Enclosure N. 82-23 (Fig. 192). The enclosure tapers towards the south-west, judging from the orientation of Sarcophagus N. 82-8, where the raised gap represents the access point into the enclosure, with a corresponding gap on the south-eastern side which would then lead into Enclosure N. 82-23 (Fig. 193). The cutting of the deep quarry which eventually formed Tomb N. 82 forecourt probably destroyed three sarcophagi in the process, two of which would have been the same size as Sarcophagus N. 82-8, the south-western one probably a large example of a similar size to Sarcophagus N. 82-18; the niche recorded by Rowe may represent the interior of its truncated case (Fig. 190).”

ENcLosuns N. 82-1

I11.15.1 Historical Background

This enclosure immediately north-west of Tomb N. 82 quarry forecourt was apparently cleared in 1956, finding Cairn N. 82-2, described by Rowe in his publication as ‘Crude child's grave made of loose stones’ (Fig. 193). In 1957 two lidless sarcophagi at the northern end overlooking the quarry were cleared.* TIL15.2 Archaeological Work Extracts from Day book fols. 8, 10 Cairn N. 82-2: Some pots left embedded in cement(?) Rock(?) (M. 520-M. 524), included two collared bowls (M. 520-521), black-glazed oinochoe and unguentarium (Assem. LI; Fig. 342 nos. 523-524).” Sarcophagi: N. 82-5 lid missing, case appar? ™ 7 ® ”

Rowe I, 9 Fig. XIV. Rowe If, 9 Fig. XIV inset and section E-F. Rowe Il Fig. XIV. Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 7; Rowe I, 9,17 Figs. X,XIV Pl. 14a, Rowe Arch. Ph. 270.

269

ently ‘broken by drain’? burial artifacts unknown except for two coins (M. 853-854) (Assem. LXXV; Fig. 370). N. 82-6 lid broken, robbed, artifacts unknown. Graves: N. 83-AG Small dish light brown ware (M. 503), Eleven coarse light pottery (Lamps vases plates etc) embedded in rock at the bottom of tomb.’ Interior seen in September 1992 still contained remains of eight hollow-ware vessels in local fabric in conglomerate of lime concretion against sides at southern end (Assem. XLI, Fig. 340). N. 83-AH ‘no remains.’ 111.15.3 Structural Description

Enclosure rectangular L. 5. 30 W. 2. 50m, with an undulating floor, containing Sarcophagi N. 82-6 and N. 82.5 on the south-eastern side with Cairn N. 82-2 in the northern corner. Sarcophagi form the boundary line overlooking a deep quarry in front of Tomb N. 82. On the exterior of the eastern side rock-cut Graves N. 83-AG, AH border the enclosure, while on the western side, lower down the slope by Enclosure N. 82-1, the natural rock surface has been stripped off in twelve rows L. 2. 60 W. 0. 60 D. 0. 25m, now appearing as weathered stepping following the hill side. Cairn N. 82-2: ‘Child's grave with stone walls. Undressed.’ The site of caitn is now featureless, only the enclosure floor being visible.” Sarcophagi N. 82-5, 6: A drain from Rowe's ‘Arab House’ was found cut through the complete depth of the case of low Sarcophagus N. 82-5, demonstrating the level of the ground surface at that date.” Grave N. 83-AG: similar in character to the rock-cut graves but twice the depth, L. 1. 84 W. 0. 65 D. 1. 03, border W. 0. 18m.

IIL15.4 Observations

This enclosure may be contemporary with Enclosure N. 82-5, based on the characteristic low sarcophagi, and predates the quarry forecourt of Tomb N. 82, while the stripped rock surface seems to be contemporary with the quarry (Figs. 179, 190, 193). In spring 1995 Grave N. 83-AG was full of rainwater, which explains the formation of lime concretion which welded the pottery to the grave sides, also found in other rock-cut burial systems such as N. 81-AC cremation deposit (Fig. 203).

ROCK-CUT TOMBS N. 81 AREA Rock-cur Tomes N. 81, N. 81 sis 111.16.1 Historical Background

Only Tomb N. 81 was recorded by Cassels who noted: ‘Rough square pillar holds the roof of the chamber up. The exterior is miserably plain.” The entrance and stelai sockets on sill were plotted by Rowe; the tomb was unexcavated and still contains hillwash, as does adjoining Tomb N. 81 bis." Forecourt N. 81-AN had an additional function as an enclosure (Fig. 195). ® 7 ?" τι =

Rowe ll,9. Burns Arch. Day Book fol. 10. Rowe 11,9. Cassels Arch. Blue Book fol. 17; Cassels (1955), 27. Rowe Il,7 Fig. XIV.

270

TII.16.2 Archaeological Work

Tomb forecourt surrounded by robbed Hellenistic sarcophagi, none of which were cleared, their lids being deliberately piled in the centre at random; some burial artifacts were found, including a Ptolemaic relief slab stele fragment (Assem. CXXV, CXXIX; Figs. 424, 426 no. 1331) A significant piece was the unweathered painted head from an aniconic half-figure which may have been toppled from the lid plinth when a forecourt sarcophagus was robbed in antiquity, as this fragment joins others from N. 81-B Upper Enclosure (Assem. XCV; Figs. 202, 255, 388 nos. 1029, 1332).

ΠΠ.16.3 Structural Description Tomb N. 81: Forecourt rectangular, L. 8. 00 W. 2. 80m bounded by two parallel rows of

three sarcophagi with one, N. 81-QQ, unfinished (Fig. 304) and two at the northern end, between which access is via a flight of steps leading up from Upper Enclosure N. 81-B (Figs. 195, 202). Facade is completely plain with a diagonal groove over the entrance for rainwater dispersal, above which on the sill there is no built cornice or screen, just an upper terraced enclosure (Fig. 194). Chamber L. 6. 40-6. 14 W. 4. 73-4. 54m with a central pillar 0. 81m square situated below large rock-cut Sarcophagus N. 81-JJ. Two wall sarcophagi are situated along one side and a pair of deep recesses could be for arcosolia, one in the southern comer L. 2. 57 W. 1. 50 and another centrally placed in the south-western wall L. 2, 32 W. 1. 50m (Fig. 195). Upper terraced enclosure: On the sill of Tomb N. 81 where a built cornice should be is a row of four stele sockets with no built screen behind. Instead there is a rough uneven floor L. 7. 80 W. 2. 80m bordered by Sarcophagus N. 81-JJ, which has a step in front of the case and a stele socket on the lid plinth, and Sarcophagus N. 81-MM, both robbed (Figs. 257, 297) Tomb N. 81 bis has a plain facade similar to that above, but the entrance is situated in the eastern corner of the forecourt below unfinished Sarcophagus N. 81-QQ (Fig. 304).” The sepulchral chamber is L. 2. 66 W. 2. 36m, its floor covered by a cone of hillwash and its burials not apparent. ΠΙ.16.4 Observations

‘The upper terraced enclosure was cut back to its present shape by the later facade of Tomb N. 81 and its forecourt N. 81-AN. This could account for the need to leave the pillar in the chamber below for support (Fig, 195). The presence of stele sockets above the entrance imply that this tomb is more likely to be Hellenistic than Romanised

(Figs. 256-257, 297). The tomb and fore-

court could be contemporary in construction to N. 81-A mentioned below which seems to predate Upper and Lower Enclosures N. 81-B (Figs. 195, 202). In the Roman period the interior was subsequently adapted as a cubiculum by cutting two arcosolium recesses (Fig. 237).

% Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 142; Rowe I Pl. 2ic.

a Rock-cur Tos N. 81-A

111.17.1 Historical Background

Superficial clearance of Forecourt N. 81-b, and the nearby Tomb N. 81-A interior planned (Figs. 196, 198). This was described in the 1956 campaign as a ‘Open courtyard (b) with door at back opening into ball (b) containing four slab-covered graves (d, e, f, 6)..." The interior, cleared in the 1957 campaign, showed the burials to be extensively robbed (Fig. 198). 111.17.2 Archaeological Work Extracts from Day book fol. 11 ‘July 24th Started clearing entrance to rock cut tomb and later started clearing courtyard tomb N81 A and area North 81 B', these referring to the forecourt N. 81-b and N. 81-B when finally published (Figs. 198, 202)."° Forecourt N. 81-b:

no reference was made to any discoveries in 1956, only those found

during its final clearance in the 1957 campaign (Assem. LXXXII; Fig. 377). After clearance and registering of artifacts from the tomb it would seem that Upper Enclosure N. 81-B was then cleared; in debris was found a large stone table (VIL. 6. 1) and numerous discarded broken artifacts from nearby robbed sarcophagi (Assem. XCI; Figs. 381-383).

Chamber (5) contained a small scatter of artifacts from surrounding robbed wall sarcophagi; also found was a piece of coral (Assem. LXXXVIII;

Fig. 380 no. 9530.

Sarcophagi (d-g): all burials disturbed and artifacts broken; some fluted amphora fragments, for example, M. 938b and M. 949a were found in two separate sarcophagi indicating the extent of their disturbance (Assem. LXXXIV-LXXXIX; Figs. 378-381). TIL17.5 Structural Description Forecourt N. 81-b square, L. 2. 60 W. 2. 40m bounded by a sarcophagus at the north-

eastern side and Sarcophagus N. 81-L, open on the south-western side and facing Upper Enclo-

sure N. 81-B (Fig. 202). Facade undecorated H. 2. 15 L. 2. 40m, a low step in front, with returns

on either side of the forecourt, has been truncated on the south-western side. The plain entrance shows a cymatium with square acroteria, between which are the weathered remains of an inscription (VII. 8. 2). Above is a deep niche with another beside it, both truncated by the sill of an upper terraced enclosure floor (Figs. 196, 198). Above and behind the facade in the eastern corner, representing the corner of Upper Enclosure N. 81-B, is a large rock-cut sarcophagus, not shown on the plan, now covered by two large tumbled sarcophagus lids, one of which originates from Sarcophagus N. 81-YY (Figs. 196, 202). Chamber H. 1. 75 L. 4. 86W. 3. 69mis bordered by four

sarcophagi with most of their cover slabs in situ leaving a space L. 2. 12 W. 2. 56m in the middle

(Figs. 198, 298),

"= Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 114; Rowe Il, 7.8 Fig. X Pl. 22c. > RoweIl Fig. X.

272 TIL17.4 Observations

Wall sarcophagus Tomb N. 81-A is significant for the cymatium above the entrance, which recalls that used on the facade of Beschi's Tomb in nearby El Mawy land and also others in Wadi bel Ghadir which have the same internal arrangement (Figs. 214, 217). The niche above the door could represent a naiskos containing a marble aniconic bust (Fig. 253). The tomb predates Upper Enclosure N. 81-B, indicated by the partial removal of the forecourt step and possibly a sarcophagus to combine it with the later enclosure area (Figs. 198, 202) Rock-cur Toms N. 81-O

III.18.1 Historical Background

Shortly before the 1957 campaign an unpublished photograph of the enclosure showing hillwash still concealing the entrance of Tomb N. 81-O was taken by the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Rome (Fig. 201). During superficial clearance of the enclosure in front of the entrance Rowe described the Door plastered in position’ and a ‘Blocking-stone in front of door-slab'. When the chamber was entered: ‘The niches in two walls of tbe "ball" contained traces of bouquets of real flowers’ (Figs. 198, 200). 111.18.2 Archaeological Work During clearance of enclosure a robber hole was noticed in the corner of a plain door slab which had also cracked across the middle. The upper part was removed revealing a burial chamber with, against the inside of the doorslab, a cone of hillwash which had come through the hole. Two discarded cover slabs were in the eastern comer, one broken in two; another had fallen into the grave, damaging some of the artifacts (Assem. XCVI, CII; Figs. 389, 396). 11.183 Structural Description Precinct filled with hillwash; on the south-eastern side is large Loculus Sarcophagus N. 81-UU by the side of large Sarcophagus N. 81-VV, both apparently robbed (Fig. 200).°%

On the lid plinth of N. 81-UU is a rectangular socket, with another below on the rebated sill (Fig. 297). Facade in the eastern corner of the enclosure is entirely plain with only the lower part of the door slab still in situ since excavation. The existence of an entablature is indicated by an isodomic shaped block cut by Sarcophagus N. 81-VV (Figs. 197, 292). Chamber H. 1. 63 L. 3. 10 W. 1. 72m, has walls roughly cut with a mason's pin, with the exception of the door surround which is finely dressed. A floor grave at the south-western end was covered by slabs, one of which now survives (Fig. 298). A continuous step runs against the south-eastern wall H. 0. 31 W. 0.24; 0. 82m above this, and in the adjoining walls are three horizontal quarryman's drafted recesses (Fig. 198). Centrally placed is Slot B: H. 0. 20 L. 2. 04 D. 0. 23m, with adjoining Slots A and C: H. 0. 20L. 1.72 D. 0. 15m on the flanking walls. ?* Deutsches Archäologisches Institut (Rome) Photographic Library neg. no. 58. 2759; 8 S Arch. 19890021 Box 2 Dixon Arch. fol. 13; Rowe Il, 1 n. 5, 8 Fig. XIV. ™ Rowe II, 8 Fig. XIV.

273 ΠΠ.18.4 Observations

‘The large Sarcophagi N. 81-UU and VV in this precinct follow the characteristic of being in pairs, clearly demonstrated by Tomb N. 145 (Fig. 251), which can be found against plain sarcophagus-facaded square chamber loculus tombs (Figs. 223, 243). The stele M. 1041 found in Lower Enclosure N. 81-B belongs to Loculus Sarcophagus N. 81-UU (Figs. 200, 202, 257). The preliminary arrangement in Phase 1 for Tomb N. 81-O interior was intended later in Phase 2 to be a burial system like Tomb N. 81-A, judging by the three quarryman’s drafted recesses cut in the walls for the intended sarcophagus cases, as indicated by the continuous step which runs below them (Fig. 198). Because the sarcophagi were never cut, Phase 3 saw two shallow recesses D. 0. 20m made in the north-east wall to provide the length for two floor graves, only one of which was eventually cut and covered by slabs, probably five in number. The ‘bouquets’ are doubtful as no photographic record of them exists, and environmentally it is unlikely that they would survive.” Burt TEMPLE Toms N. 77 Π|.19.1 Historical Background

The tomb is a prominent landmark on the hillslope, recorded in a photograph taken by the Deutsches Afrikakorps in 1942, which shows that more of the isodomic work was exposed at that time than when seen by Cassels eleven years later (Fig. 199)." This is the only built rectangular tomb within the area of Rowe's clearance, situated in the north-eastern part of an enclosure in which Sarcophagi N. 81-UU and VV are buried to their lids in hillwash (Fig. 200). 111.19.2 Archaeological Work The tomb interior contains undisturbed hillwash which points to Rowe's lack of work here.

111.19.3 Structural Description

Euthynteria of large roughly-squared blocks H. 0. 74 L. 1. 75 Th. 0. 58m forms also the northern boundary limit of the enclosure which drops sharply with a terrace of sarcophagi (Fig. 200). Built structure H. 2. 39, exposed L. 3. 53 (4. 16) W. 2. 26m set back by 0. 80m; on the euthynteria are four courses of isodomic work (Fig. 200), the first a plinth with 0. 08m offset, the third showing a cut-down triangular lifting boss at the northern corner, the top course a plain entablature. Roof shows three slabs in situ H. 0. 40 L. 2. 17 W. 0. 58m, the outer one with an undecorated pediment, raking cornice and three acroteria bases, followed by two others with a plinth H. 0. 10 W. 0. 80m running along the ridge. On the roof slope is a square socket, and along the top of the raking cornice are eight dowel holes Dia. 0. 035 D. 0. 04m between acroteria at 0. 18m intervals, one on each acroterion and ten surviving at 0. 160m intervals along each side of. © Thorn (1994), 104. © Deutsches Archäologisches Institut (Rome) Photographic Library, neg. no. 42. 368; Cassels (1955),27 Fig. 4 δ Fairman Arch. Rowe Phs. 105, 129 Rowe II Pls. 19b, 23a

274

r: compartmentH. 1. 99 L. (1. 90)W. 0. 94m which is a single-level the cornice (Fig. 297). Interio extremely weathered. 111.19.4 Observations

The construction is like Tomb N. 208 in El Mawy land where the lower level is in the body of the rock-cut stepped base, but in modular size the Cyrenaican Aslaia Tomb is identical, which may point to a different burial practice being adopted (Figs. 243, 266). Upper ENCLOSURE N. 81-B Π|.20.1 Historical Background

The forecourt N. 81-b of Tomb N. 81-A was partly cleared in 1956 (Fig. 198). In the following 1957 campaign the surrounding area was named N. 81-B; this eventually revealed two enclosures, the upper one, called by Rowe ‘south-eastern’ described here," the lower described later (Fig. 202). All the sarcophagi were opened except N. 81-WW which had a badly smashed case. In his notes Dixon assigned a red-figure kalpis to ‘N. 81-B — offering deposit (Fig. 383 no. 984), not mentioned by Rowe in his final publication." After Rowe's excavations the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut photographed the enclosure as a general view." 111.202 Archaeological Work

Extracts from Dixon fols. 13-14 Upper Enclosure: filled with deep hillwash and debris; scatter of broken artifacts found including a bell krater (Assem. CVIII; Figs. 381-382, 400 nos. 976, 1106). Complete model red-figured kalpis from ‘offering deposit’, also lamp and oinochoe probably included (Assem. XCI; Figs. 381-383 nos. 984-986). Three bronze coins were found, and another assemblage may be represented by a collared bowl and unguentaria (Asem. XCV; Figs. 385-386 nos.

1008-1020, 1022-1024). Terracotta grave cover suggests an enclosure inhuma-

tion, not necessarily with burial artifacts. Toppled, very weathered aniconic half-figure was probably found in upper levels (Assem. XCV; Figs. 387-388 nos,

1025-(1029 bis)).""°

Sarcophagi: N. 81-L: small group of burial artifacts containing funeral wreath fragments,

amphora, globular unguentarium and series of model vessels (Assem. CI; Fig. 395 nos. 1074 --

1080). Unpublished group of artifacts may be linked to this assemblage by similarity of two model vessels M. 1073-1074. N. 81-Mt small group of broken artifacts containing bronze needle, blackglazed lekanis, pair of lamps, red-painted pelike in local fabric and lid (Assem. CV; Fig. 397 nos. 1093-1097). N. 81-W: ‘Robbed. frags. of painted pottery.’ On circumstantial evidence this could describe two-handled pyxis and two lamps (Assem. XCV; Fig. 385 nos. 1004 bis-1006). = "3 ?* ?* ?*

Rowe Il,7. Dixon Arch. fol. 20; Rowe II, 24 Deutsches Archäologisches Institut (Rome) Photographic Library, neg. no. 58. 2655. Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 114; Rowe II Pl 22c. Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 155; Rowe II Pl. 302.

275

111.20.3 Structural Description

Upper Enclosure is an irregular-shaped rectangle L. 4. 80 W. 3. 20m, the northern corner including Tomb N. 81-A forecourt N. 81-b (Fig. 198). The enclosure floor is terraced in three stepped levels towards Tomb N. 81 forecourt N. 81-AN (Figs. 195, 202). The lower level is bordered on the north-western side by Sarcophagus N. 81-M" and on the south-west by Sarcophagus N. 81-W which define its limits. On the middle level 0. 10m higher a three-legged table (Fig. 295)" is placed against and below Sarcophagus N. 81-WW which defines the south-western limit of the middle level and the upper level, which is 0. 80m higher. A flight of steps leads down from Tomb N. 81 forecourt N. 81-AN on to each level of the Upper Enclosure, with the lower level continuing on to Lower Enclosure N. 81-B, separated by rock-cut Sarcophagi N. 81-L and N. 81-M (Fig. 202). SARCOPHAGI: N. 81-L: D. ‘70. Ooms.’ N. 81-M: ‘Semi-cireular slot in each end of lid D. 66. Ooms.’ (Fig. 304).

N. 81-W: D. ‘105cms.”

11I.20.4 Observations

This enclosure truncated the upper part of Tomb N. 81-A facade and a possible sarcophagus in its forecourt (Figs. 198, 202). The half-figure and its head which is in Manchester Museum may belong together (Assem. XCV; Fig. 388 nos. 1029, 1332), the latter found in Enclosure N. 81-AN in debris clearance (Figs. 195, 202). There is also a group of complete artifacts with no provenance, but model vessel M. 1073 is a duplicate of M. 1074, which is provenanced to Sarcophagus N. 81-L, probably the common origin for this group of artifacts (Assem. C, CI; Figs. 394-395). A marble hand assigned to Sarcophagus N. 81-W only as an intrusive item belongs to a half-figure (Assem. CVI; Fig. 400 no. 1105). Lower ENCLOSURE N. 81-B. TIL21.1 Historical Background

The eastern end was cleared in 1956, revealing the lid of Sarcophagus N. 81-C. The remainder, called by Rowe the ‘north-western’ enclosure (Fig. 202), full of hillwash and debris level with the plinth of Sarcophagus N. 81-1, was excavated in the 1957 campaign, revealing a unique limestone aniconic half-figure close to the three-legged table and a cremation group. A general view of the lower enclosure was published by the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut in 1957, and Professor Bacchielli published the most recent view (Fig. 201)." 77 Fairman Arch. Rowe ?* Fairman Arch. Rowe 7? Fairman Arch. Rowe ?? Rowe Il, 24, 7? Fairman Arch. Rowe graphic Library neg. no.

Ph. 129; Rowe IT Pl. 19b. Phs. 118-119; RoweII Pls. 20a, c. Ph. 129; Rowe II Pl 19b. Phs. 71, 92; Rowe IL, 7 Fig. X Pls. 11c, 23a; Deutsches Archiologisches Institut (Rome) Photo58. 2758; Bacchielli (1994), 103.

276

11.21.2 Archaeological Work Extracts from Dixon fol. 13 In the first clearings ‘Fragments black ware pottery, Fragments lamp, Fragments pottery’ were found (Assem. LXIX; Fig. 367). The toppled aniconic half-figure was found in three major fragments in upper levels of south-western part of enclosure (Assem. ΧΟΥΠ; Figs. 202, 390). Its head M. 1040 had parted from the body M. 1045, and according to Dixon was found near the northern corner of Sarcophagus N. 81-M, the body lying on the opposite side of the enclosure by Sarcophagus N. 81:1. It was broken from the waist through the alabastron, across the left hand and along the folds to the shoulder. Dixon remembers this part of the figure being lifted on to the nearby three-legged stone table, in the early stages of being revealed. Also discovered were two slab stelai (Assem. LXXVIII; Fig. 391 nos. 1041, 1042+), cremation group or enchytrismos (Assem. XCVIII; Fig. 392 nos. 1043-1044) and a miscellany of broken artifacts, most probably from the nearby robbed sarcophagi (Assem. XCIX; Figs 392393) Cremation Group: Small enchytrismos assemblage against Sarcophagus N. 81-M, according to Dixon: 'a large buff amphora b. 49. 0; d. 31. 0 containing incinerated remains & a smaller vase, was

found N-W of this sarcophagus in the courtyard 81-Β᾽, also an unregistered amphora (Assem. XCVIII; Figs. 202, 392 no. 1043 bis). Sarcophagi:

81-K: Amphora M. 993 could be intrusive

with the other burial artifacts (Assem. XCII, XCIV; Fig. 394). N. 81-J: Two lamps M. 1083-1084

published, but by their numbering artifacts M. 1085-1091 may belong (Assem. CII; Fig. 396).

N. 81-N: ‘Deposit to N. 81-]? pottery embedded in plaster.’ N. 81-C: ‘No bones.’ Lid was lifted in the early stages of clearance of the enclosure."* Broken figurines M. 929, 931 published; completeness of small casserole M. 924 and oinochoe M. 935 would seem to define the limits of this assemblage, which is also indicated by two joining fragments (Assem. LXXXIII; Fig. 378 nos. 925, 934). N. 81-Q: Robbed; on circumstantial numerical evidence the only possible artifacts to have originated from this burial are a lamp, a kantharos goblet, a collared bowl and a lopas (Assem. XCIX;

Fig. 392-393 nos.

1054-1057).”

1121.3 Structural Description Lower Enclosure: rectangular L. 6. 35 W. 2. 39m with rough, uneven quarry-cut floor sur-

rounded by sarcophagi; on the south-eastern side are Sarcophagi N. 81-L, N. 81-M with a gap between them, used as an access point with very crude steps leading down into the enclosure (Fig. 202); at the north-eastern end is Sarcophagus N. 81-K with a return on the north-western side of a continuous row of four low Sarcophagi, and at the south-western end Sarcophagus N. 81-Q. A three-legged table, its surface pitted through weathering, is symmetrically placed in front of Sarcophagus N. 81-I (Fig. 295).

Sarcophagi: N. 81-K: D. ‘71. Ooms. Lid plastered in position’ Large robber hole in the case side = "> ?* 75 7?* 77 7?

Fairman Fairman Fairman Fairman Fairman Fairman Fairman

Arch. Arch. Arch. Arch. Arch. Arch. Arch.

Rowe Rowe Rowe Rowe Rowe Rowe Rowe

Phs. Ph. Phs. Phs. Phs. Ph. Phs.

103, 114; Burns Arch. Day Book fol. 12; Rowe II Fig. X Pls. 22b, 23a. 130; Rowe II Pl. 19a 164, 114, 126-128; Rowe II, 20 Fig. XIV Pls. 20b, 22c, 27a, 28-c. 167, 125; Rowe II Pls. 25a, 26a 114, 107; Rowe II Pls. 22c, 23b. 129; Rowe II PL 19b. 129, 118-119; Rowe II Pls. 19b, 20a, c.

277 facing into the enclosure.”

N. 81-J: D.

‘67 cms.’

Ὁ N. 81-N: D.

‘43. Ocms.

rock-cut.

no lid”

N. 8I-C: variant with an acroterion on the south side of the sloping lid. D. ‘73, Ocms. lid plastered to case’ (Fig. 305).”'

N.

81-P:

Rectangular

socket

on the plinth

(Figs.

256,

297).

N.

81-Q:

D. ‘69. Ooms.’ Aniconic half-figure socket on the plinth. The lid shows a robbing feature behind, probably the cause of the half-figure toppling forward into the enclosure (Assem. XCVII; Figs. 202, 255, 297, 390).

TIL21.4 Observations.

The early registration numbers of the cremation group imply that this would have been

found in the upper levels of the enclosure at the same time as the aniconic half-figure (Fig. 202)."*

Limestone slab stele M. 1041 has base dimensions which seem to match the cut socket on the. rebated lower sill of Loculus Sarcophagus N. 81-UU (Figs. 257, 304, 391). This lower sill was used earlier, and would be suitable for installing a naiskos containing Rowe's aniconic half-figure (Fig, 254). Small Sarcophagus N. 81-N may be interpreted as a cremation, and the ‘plaster’ could represent natural lime concretion similar to that found on the artifacts from N. 81-AC for example (Figs. 202-203). ENCLOSURE N. 81-BB 111.22.1 Historical Background

The rectangular enclosure is the upper part of a block of three which includes N. 81-KK and AB, overall L. 14. 70 W. 7. 65m, with individual overall lengths of 5. 15, 4. 60 and 4. 95m. These have been regularly laid out (Figs. 203, 206) with pairs of robbed sarcophagi on all four sides, terraced into the hillside (Figs. 165-166). The enclosure was cleared and most of the sarcophagi apparently opened by Rowe (Fig. 203). A photograph was taken after this clearance by the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Rome, intended for a review of archaeological work since 1942, and a copyd of the view was later supplied to Richard Goodchild for his publication ‘Kyrene und

Apollonia"

111.22.2 Archaeological Work Extracts from Dixon fol. 14 During enclosure clearance fragments of two red-figure bell kraters were found (Assem. CVI; Figs. 398-399, nos. 1098a-b), which joined pieces found in Enclosure N. 81-KK. Sarcophagi: N. 81-X: ‘Robbed.’No evidence for artifacts. N. 81-Z: apparently robbed, but based on rodent damage on a small group of artifacts these may have originated here "> Fairman Arch, Rowe Phs. 130, 110, 103; Rowe II Pls. 19a, 22b, 23a, ?? Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 103; Rowe II Pl. 23a, δ Fairman Arch. Rowe Phs. 71, 114, 103, 107; Rowe II Pls. 11c, 226, 23a-b, ?* Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 130; Rowe IT Pl. 19a. © Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 130; Rowe II Pl. 19a. ?* Fairman Arch. Rowe Phs. 213, 212; Rowe II Pls. 182-b. 7^ Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 131; Rowe II PL 23c; Deutsches Archäologisches Institut (Rome) Photographic Library neg. no. 58. 2654; Sichtermann (1959), 279-281 Abb. 12-14; Goodchild (1971), 166 Abb. 126.

218

(Assem. CX; Fig. 401). N. 81-AA: ‘robbed. (contents: 2 small pots & frags)’. Some artifacts may have originated here (Assem. CXII; Fig. 402). N. 81-CC: ‘robbed.’ A small group of artifacts may have originated here (Assem. CXIV; Fig. 403).

11.223 Structural Description

Enclosure L. 2. 20 W. 5. 30 D. 2. 00m, rough uneven floor, with a gap between Sarcophagi N. 81-EE, N. 81-DD on the north-west, giving a sloping access from middle Enclosure N. 81-KK. On the north-western side Sarcophagi N. 81-CC to N. 81-FF are stepped down following the contours of the hillside, appearing as low sarcophagi from Enclosure N. 81-BB (Fig. 203). A small four-legged table is situated in front of Sarcophagus N. 81- (Fig. 295). Sarcophagi: N. 81-Y: Round socket (Fig. 297). N. 81-X: without plinth (Fig. 305). D.’56. Ooms.” N. 81-Z: Square socket on plinth (Fig. 297), inscription on lid slope (VII. 11. 2). D.’52. Ocms. robbed. hole in N. E. corner of lid’. N. 81-AA: ‘Inscription on sloping face of lid’, D.’55. Ocms.’

(VIL. 11. 2). N. 81-CC: Sockets on plinth (Fig. 297). D.’54. Ooms.’N. 81-DD: Sockets on plinth (Fig. 297)

1II.22.4 Observations

The lid of Sarcophagus N. 81-2 is shown being lifted before Enclosure N. 81-BB was fully cleared.” The ‘contents’ of Sarcophagus N. 81-AA mentioned by Dixon may refer to two collarcd bowls, only one of which is published,”* and may also include a loom weight (Assem. CXII; Fig. 402 nos. 1126-1128). Another bowl is published as also originating from this assemblage, but judging from marks of rodent gnawing on this and other artifacts it is more likely to have come from robbed Sarcophagus N. 81-Z (Assem. CX; Fig. 401 no. 1121).

ENcosure N. 81-KK Π|.23.1 Historical Background

The rectangular enclosure has pairs of sarcophagi on three sides representing inhumations, half of which were unopened because of their robber damage (Fig. 203). Across the middle are small sarcophagi which were totally buried in hillwash and contained undisturbed primary cremations (Fig. 203). The most important discovery was that of a half-figure inscribed with the letters ΘΈΑ on the polos (Asem. CXX Fig. 411 no. 1185)."* ?* Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. »" Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. ?* Rowe II, 24. ? Rowe Π 24. ?* Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. “Reynolds, Thorn (2000a)

133; Rowe II PL 21a. 131; Rowe II Fig. XIV section G-H Pl. 23c. 212; Rowe II Pl. 188. in preparation.

279

111.23 2 Archaeological Work Extracts from Dixon fols. 14-15 describe briefly the condition of the burials which included three small cremations with their assemblages undisturbed in the enclosure’s lower level.

Enclosure:

well-sculpted female head with polos; significant small complete half-figure found

in debris; and a small fragment which could be aniconic (Assem. CXVI, CXVIII, CXX; Figs.

406-407, 411 nos. 1153, 1160, 1185, 1333).'* Fragments of several bell kraters join those from Enclosure N. 81-BB, e. g. first krater: M. 1098a joins M. 1177. 1; second krater: M. 1098b is part of M. 1307a; third krater: M. 1098f joins part of M. 1177. 3 (Assem. CVI, CXX; Figs. 203, 398-399,

409-411).!° Other significant pieces are: model lekythos and fragments of large painted bowl (Assem. CXVIII; Figs. 406-407 nos. 1159, 1166, 1172 bis). Sarcophagi: N. 81-GG: ‘robbed’.

Some artifacts may have originated here (Assem.

CXXIV; Fig.

422-423). N. 81-5: ‘robbed.’ Some artifacts may have originated here (Assem. CXXV; Fig. 424). N. 81-TT: Oinochoe, kylix krater, collared bowl; two other pieces possibly intrusive (Assem. CXXVII, Fig. 426 nos. 1322-1324).

Caskets: descriptions based on Dixon’s photographs of the cremation burials (Fig. 203). N. BLRR: ‘(= offering deposit?)’. Case damaged when opened, indicated orientation of arti facts." Cremation spread evenly around case interior, the depth unknown. Resting on cremation is narrow-necked jug M. 1173 at eastern end on north-south axis, the mouth facing north; skyphos M. 1175 partly buried lies on its side facing eastwards at right angles to M. 1173. Snail concentration covers cremation, showing M. 745ii and iii to be present. I confirmed this concentration in 1992, when examples of shells were found in M. 1173. A ring-like object appears near the skyphos handle on the northern side M. 1172a, the latter published as “three earrings’ with diameter measurements erroneously given as lengths (Assem. CXIX; Fig. 408). N. 81-AD: ‘Small sarcophagus. . Intact. Astifacts in situ, orientation unclear, probably as N. 81-RR, described here on same axis." Cremation spread evenly around case interior, the depth unknown. Resting on cremation at eastern end is baby feeder M. 1260 on its side, spout facing westwards, with narrow-necked amphora M. 1257 on its side immediately to the north, lip pointing towards east. Parietal bones with unfused sagittal sutures evident, together with a metatarsal and other bones which have accumulated against burial artifacts at south-west side; remaining part of cremation shows small infant bones (Assem. CXXII; Fig. 420). N. 81-AC: ‘Sarcophagus. Intact.’ Cremation evenly spread around case interior, on which rest clusters of ceramics coated in thick lime concretion" piled in two large groups at case extremities, leaving middle virtually clear for model vessels: red-figured kalpides M. 1243-1244, squat

lekythos M. 1249, kalpis M. 1245, squat hydria M. 1246 and figurine M. 1237. Each cluster seems

to have been deposited carcfully, as there is no indication of rough treatment. Sherds of broken water amphorae M. 1208a-c were stacked together and placed inside. None of the silver, bronze and iron objects M. 1189-1206 can be detected (Assem. CXXI; Figs. 412-418).

79"© 7^ ‘© “ "9

Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 158; Rowe IL PL 32b in reverse, Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 144; Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 183; Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 162; RoweII Pl. 39d in reverse.

Rove II Pl. 31b. Rowe I PI. 26c. Rowe II Pl. 26b. Rowe II Pl. 24b.

280

111.23.3 Structural Description

3. 50 W. 5. 20m, its uneven floor at two levels, the upper L. 1. 70 Enclosure rectangular L. D. 1. 40, the lower L. 1. 80 D. 0. 70m, separated by a vertical face H. 0. 70m. The upper level has ἃ continuous step H. 0. 24 W. 0. 24m in front of Sarcophagi N. 81-EE, N. 81-DD, which from this side appear as raised sarcophagi (Fig. 166). In the eastern corner a smal] three-legged table (Fig. 295) is asymmetrically placed in front of Sarcophagus N. 81-LL which has a smashed lid. In the western corner Sarcophagus N. 81-AC is cut in the floor at the edge of the upper level. In the lower level Sarcophagi N. 81-RR, N. 81-AD are cut in the floor against the foot of the vertical face. A square landing is cut from the floor in the upper level, one side of which is now the case of Sarcophagus N. 81-AC; the landing projects into the lower level by Sarcophagus N. 81-AD. At the sides the sarcophagi appear to follow the contours of the hillslope, stepping down in pairs, N. 8L-LL, N. 81-AF in the upper level, N. 81-GG, N. 81-AE in the lower level. On the northwestern side are N. 81.88, N. 81-TT, appearing as low sarcophagi, with a gap between them for Fig. 206).

Sarcophagi: N. 81-GG: D.‘55. Ocms.’. "The lid bas obviously been taken from another grave and re-used. At either end of it is a slot and a protuberance, the slot being cut below the protuberance which was the original feature before the lid was re-used. There are 3 small irregularly arranged rectangular slots in the top of the Pedestal (Fig. 297). N. 81-SS: ‘Traces of red paint on edge of chest. D. 59. Jems.’ Round sockets on plinth (Fig. 297). N. 81-TT: "Inscription (name): TATIAZ cut in the sloping face of the lid.’ (VIL. 11. 2; Rowe II Pl. 21b). ‘lid plastered in position. D.‘55. Ooms. N. 81-RR: D.24. Ocms inside case’. "Intact... Lid plastered in position’. (Fig. 305). N. 81-AD: D-21. Ooms’. “lid plastered in position. No pedestal. The lid slopes down on 1 side only of the ridge, the other presenting a flat horizontal surface. Acroteria on the sloping side only of the lid.’ (Fig. 305). N. 81-AC: D.'42. 0cms." Lid plastered in position. In the top of each of the 4 acroteria is cut a small round hole (clearly visible only in 2 cases). Half-figure socket on plinth (Figs. 297, 305). Π|.23.4 Observations

It would seem that the three small cremation caskets were later additions to the surrounding sarcophagi of the enclosure, which were for inhumations. The table in front of Sarcophagus N. 8LLL was probably shifted to one side for the purpose of cutting further sarcophagi like N. 81-AC at the edge of the vertical face, which was not carried out. ENCLOSURE N. 81-AB

TIL24.1 Historical Background

The lowest of the three enclosures on the hillslope with island sarcophagi overlooking the peripheral group of sarcophagi, four out of the seven sarcophagi left unopened as before, through their being already robbed in antiquity (Figs. 206, 252, 304-305). Sarcophagus N. 81:1 features in an unpublished photographic study of 1956 by the Deutsches Archäologisches Institut. ταὶ Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 154; Rowe Il PL. 24a. "7 Deutsches Archäologisches Institut (Rome) Photographic Library neg. no. 58. 2757; Rowe II Pl. C.

281

111.24.2 Archaeological Work

Extracts from Dixon fols. 14, 16 From forecourt debris a fragment of red-figured stemless cup joins a piece from neighbouring Enclosure N. 81-AN (Assem. CXXII; Figs. 195, 419 nos. 1205A, 1308); fragments of two small limestone heads, one of which is aniconic; fragments of red figured kylix (Assem. CXXIV, CXXVI; Figs. 421, 425 nos. 1265, 1270, 1320). Sarcophagi: N. 81-HH: ‘robbed.’ Some artifacts may have originated here (Assem. CXXIV; Fig. 423). N. 81-1: Three strigils, two stemless cups (Assem. CXV; Figs. 404-405 nos. 1137a-b, 1144-1146). N. 81-AI: Bronze object, now lost; fragments of large bowl; model chous (Assem. CXXVIII; Fig. 426, nos. 1327-1329). Possible connection with stemless cup mentioned below. 111.24.3 Structural Description Enclosure L. 2. 40 W. 5. 04 D. 0. 85m. On the north-eastern side are two sarcophagi of

Enclosure N. 81-KK (Fig. 203) appearing as normal sarcophagus cases as they face into the enclosure, Below these at the sides are two more sarcophagi. Cut as low island sarcophagi are two pairs representing the north-eastern limit of the block of three enclosures (Fig. 206). Sarcophagi: N. 81-HH: Rectangular sockets on plinth (Figs. 257, 297). D.‘62 Ooms.’ N. 81.11: (Fig. 304). ‘Inscription on sloping face of lid (VII. 11. 2). D.‘53. Ocms.’ Because the inscription does not face into the enclosure, itis evident that the lid has been incorrectly replaced. N. SI-AE Rectangular socket on plinth (Figs. 257, 297). ‘Protuberance at either end of the lid for lifting-tackle (Fig. 304). Inscription (name): AIAQXOZ cut in the sloping face of the lid (VII. 11. 2). D.58. Ooms. N. 81-AH: Round socket on plinth (Fig. 297) 111.24.4 Observations

The cutting of pairs of sarcophagi as N. 81-I and N. 81-XX was also noticed in Enclosure N. 82-24 with the smaller N. 82-10 and N. 82-11 (Fig.

193). The free-standing pair N. 81-Al and

N. SI-AJ are a variation of the triple arrangement where the third sarcophagus is placed across one end; examples appear in the vicinity of Rowe's Tomb M. 7 underneath the Mudir's house (Figs. 57, 252). Graffiti on the stemless cup may indicate a connection with the robbed Sarcophagus N. 81-AI (Fig. 419 nos. 1205B, 1308).

PEmPHERAL GROUP N. 81 TIL.25.1 Historical Background

The area was partially cleared and sarcophagus lids exposed; some were excavated but others left unopened (Figs. 204-206). No survey drawing was done of this area, but reference was

made to the finding of two inscriptions, one of them modern, possibly Italian, on sarcophagus lids (VII. 11. 2)."°

© Rowe Il 9.

282

ΠΙ.25.2 Archaeological Work

Extracts from Dixon fols. 13-14 Most of the burials have no evidence for artifacts, as Dixon's notes indicate. Sarcophagi: N. 81-R: ‘Robbed’ but various bronze artifacts registered, i cluding strigil, small disk mirror, needles, a ring and tacks (Assem. CIV; Fig. 397). N. 81: ‘Robbed.’ Graves: N. 81-S: ‘Robbed.’ N. 81-U: 'Child's grave. traces of pottery & cement. Contents Nil? N. 81-V: "Child's grave. traces of pottery & cement. Robbed.’ 1|.25.3 Structural Description

The arrangement consists of four enclosed areas, the first represented by two terraced rows of sarcophagi 0. 70m apart, of which only the upper terrace was investigated (Fig. 206). Another area 0. 97m further down is bordered by a number of sarcophagi whose lids show no central plinths. The next area is more irregular, but has a toppled false sarcophagus near N. 81-T (Fig. 305). Beyond this a small square enclosureL. 2. 44 W. 2. 30m comprises a unit of six sarcophagi including Sarcophagus N. 81-(b). Sarcophagi: N. 81-R: ‘Slab-covered.’ D.'53. Ocms.’ N. 81-T:

D.‘48cms.’ Graves: N. 81-S: ‘Slab-

covered.’ D.36. Ooms.’ L. 1. 16 W. 0. 54m. N. 81-U: D.'20. Ooms.’ L. 0. 88 W. 0. 35m. N. 81-V: ‘Slab-covered.’ D.'21. Ooms.” Π|.25.4 Observations.

Graves N. 81-S, N. 81-U seem to be contemporary with Sarcophagus N. 81-R which also forms the western boundary line to Lower Enclosure N. 81-B (Figs. 202, 206). The false sarcophagus would seem to be intended to be used as a lid beside Sarcophagus N. 81-T as an alternative method of adding a later burial, appearing as a block-cut or rock-cut grave (Fig. 305).

283

LIST OF FIGURES CHAPTER TIT

Rowe’s Necropolis Excavation

Figs. 164-206.

Introduction Fig, Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig, Fig,

164 165 166 167 168 169

Extent of Rowe's Northern Necropolis excavations in 1956 and 1957 Numerical key to rock-cut tombs and sarcophagus enclosures Longitudinal sections of excavated Areas N. 83-N. 81; scatter of rock-cut graves Suggested sequence of development, N. 83 Area Suggested sequence of development, N. 82 Area Suggested sequence of development, N. 81 Area

dio.) ILO.)) (11.0.1; 11.1.0) 10) (ILLO) ao)

Area N. Fig. 170 Fig. 171 ig. 172 ig. 173 Fig. 174 Fig. 175 Fig. 176 Fig, 177 Fig, 178 Fig. 179 Fig. 180 Fig. 181 Fig, 182 Fig. 183 Fig. 184 Fig. 185 Fig. 186 Fig. 187 Fig. 188

83 TombN. 83 forecourt loculi entrances {π|13) Tomb N. 83 interior Porcher watercolout, 1861 1.1) Location plan: rock-cut cubiculum Tomb N. 83; forecourt and interior plans ILLLA Interior elevations of rock-cut cubiculum Tomb N. 83 1.13) Sequence of development, loculus to cubiculum, Tomb N. 83; plan, N. 83 bis (1.1.4; 1.23) Location plan: rock-cut facade loculus Tomb N. 83-BF complex (na Tomb N. 83-BF facade {Π|33} Tomb N. 83-BF built balustrade screen. 35) Plan and elevation, rock-cut facade loculus Tomb N. 83-BF; N. 83-BF bis (13.3; 1.43) Location plans: graves N. 83-A to F, N. 82-20; Enclosures N. 83-8, N. 83-U 01.5.1, 11.6.1, HIL7.1) Location plan: graves N. 83-AI to AZ; Rowe's Day Book: burial in N. 83-AZ; Enclosure N. 83-W (18.1.2; 119.1) Location plan: sarcophagus Enclosure N. 89-BK. 10.1) Exposed in quarry chippings, 1956 10.13) Sarcophagus N. 83-BI cleared, 1956 {π|10.1.3} Rowe's Day Book: position of burial artifacts, Sarcophagi N. 83-BI, N. 83-BG 1.102) Sarcophagus N. 83-BJ cleared, 1956 (11.10.13) Enclosure N. 83-BK cleared, 1956 ILI) Rowe's Day Book: position of burial artifacts, Sarcophagi N. 83-BH, N. 83-BJ 01.102) Suggested sequence of development N. 83-BK; Dixon's annotated sketch of sarcophagus group N. 83-BN to BU; position of burial artifacts rom Sarcophagus N. 83-BT IL104, 1.11.12)

Area N, Fig. 189 Fig. 190 Fig. 191 Fig. 192 Fig. 193

82 Tomb N. 82 quarry forecourt looking south-east Location plan: quarry forecourt complex, cubiculum Tomb N. 82 Dixon’s sketch of cubiculum, Tomb N. 82; interior plan and elevation EnclosureN. 82-23 showing circular holes against step, 1957 Location plan: Enclosure N. 82-25; partly destroyed sarcophagus Enclosures N. 82.24, N. 82-1

Area N. Fig. 194 Fig. 195 Fig. 196 Fig. 197 Fig. 198 Fig. 199 Fig. 200 Fig. 201

81 Tomb N. 81 in enclosure Location plan: sarcophagus Enclosure N. 81-AN complex; Tombs N. 81, N. 81 bis Tomb N. 81-A unexcavated, looking cast, 1956 Tomb N. 81-0 and Loculus Sarcophagus N. 81-UU, cleared, 1957 Plans and sections: Tomb N. 81-A, Tomb N. 81-O; suggested sequence of development, N. 81-0 Temple Tomb N. 77 looking east, Deutsches Afrikakorps 1942 Location plans: Tombs N. 81-O, N. 77; plan and clevation, temple Tomb N. 77 Sarcophagus N. 81-UU area before excavation, 1956

{1123} IL2.1) GILI2,3) (1133) (113.1, 1.14.1, 45.1) (111163) IL161,5) (L173) (183) (1.17.1, 3; 183-4) mio ILS; 193) (183)

284

Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig.

202 203 204 205 206

plan: Upper and Lower Enclosures N. 81-B with Dixon's sketch Location Location plan: Enclosures N. 81-BB, N. 81-KK; position of burial artifacts from. Sarcophagi N. 81-RR, AD and AC Sarcophagi, N. 81 cleared area looking south-west, 1957 Sarcophagi, N. 81 cleared area looking north, 1957 Location plans: complex of Enclosure N. 81-AB and Peripheral Group, Area N. 81

(11201; 1121.2) (1122.1; 11.23.12) (1125.1) (125.1) (11124.1 1.25.1)

285 Norton 1911 excavations Rowe's excavations P i

Aer Cassels "Note: Necropolis sectors were redefined by Cassels after 1955 (Fig 47; Cassels (1955) Fig. 1)

Fic. 164 ~ Extent of Rowe's Northern Necropolis excavationsin 1956 and 1957 (IILO.1)

286

Aer Rowe Fic. 165 - Numerical key to rock-cut tombs and sarcophagus enclosures Area Ν. 83 Rock-cut Tombs Enclosures LN. 83 N. 83S 2. N. 85 δ ΤΟΝ. 85:0. 3.N. S-BF 9. N. 8-W 4. N. 83-BF bis. 10. N. 8-BK ArcaN. 82 Rock-cut Tombs Enclosures 12. N.82 13. Ν. 82:25 14. Ν. 8224 15. N.82-1 Area N. 81 Rock-cut Tombs Enclosures 16. N.81,N.81bis 20. N.81-BUpper 17. N.SLA 21. N.81-B Lower 18. N.81.0 22. Ν. 81:88 Built Tomb 2. N.8LKK 19.N.77 24. N.8L-AB.

(IIL.0.1). Rock-cut Graves 5. Upper Group 8. Lower Group Sarcophagus Group 11. N.83-BN-BU

Peripheral Group 25. Unpub. by Rowe

287

Sexton CD

TomdN.82

AlterRowe

Fic. 166 - Longitudinal sections of excavated AreasN. 83-N. 81; scatter of rock-cut graves (IILO.1; TIL) 1, Enclosure N. 81-W; 2. Enclosure N. 83-BK; 3. Quarry; 4. Enclosure N. 81-BB; 5. Enclosure N. 81-AB; 6. EnclosureN. 81-KK;7. Forecourt; 8. Grave.

288

Fic. 167 - Suggested sequence of development,N. 83 Area {1.0}. 1. Loculus Tomb N. 83; 2. Sarcophagus Group N. 83-BN - BU; 3. Enclosure N. 83-5; 4. Enclosure N. 33-U; 5. Enclosure N. 83-W; 6. Tomb N. 83-BF; 7. Enclosure N. 83-BK; S. Tomb N. 83-BF bis; 9. Graves N. 83-BC, BD; 10. Grave N. 83-AG; 11. Cubiculum Tomb N. 83; 12. Cistern; 13. Infilled Enclosure N. 83-BK; 14. Stripped surface; 15. Quarry.

289

Phase 78,11

Phase 14:16

Fic. 168 — Suggested sequence of development, N. 82 Area (IIL.1.0) 1, Loculus Tomb N, 83; 2. Enclosure N. 82-1; 3. Tomb N. 83-BF; 4, Enclosure N. 83-W; 5. Enclosure N. 83-BK; 6. Enclosure N. 82-83; 7. Enclosure N. 82-24; 8. Grave N. 83-AG; 9. Grave N. 85:86, BD; 10. Cubiculum Tomb N. 83; 11. Tomb N. 82; 12. Disused quarry; 13. Stripped surface; 14, Infilled Enclosure N. 83-BK.

290

Phase 2, 9-10, 12

Phase 10-12

Phase 214

Fic. 169 ~ Suggested sequence of development, N. 81 Area (IIL.1.0). 1. Tomb N. 81; 2. Enclosure N. 81-AN; 3. Tomb N. 81-A; 4. Tomb N. 81.0; 5. Enclosures N. 81-BB, KK, AB, 6. Enclosures N. 81-B Upper and Lower; 7. Buried precinct; 8. Island sarcophagi; 9. Square enclosure; 10. TombN. 77; 11. Terraced sarcophagi; 12. Square enclosure; 13. Unexcavated sarcophagi; 14. Peripheral Area.

291

Fic. 171 - Tomb N. 83 interior - Porcher watercolour, 1861 (ΠΠ.1.1).

292

Fic. 172 - Location plan: rock-cut cubiculum TombN. 83; forecourt and interior plans {Π1.1.3)Ἅ 1a. Rock-cut cistern;2a. Sarcophagus lid; 3a. Boundary wall; 4a. Boundary line; 5a. Farlier grave; 6a, Steps;7a. Niche7;8a. Arcosolium 8;9a. Grave 10; 10a. Niche 9; 11a. Cubiculum;12a. Arcosolia; 13a. Grave4; 14a. Forma3; 15a. Assemblage XXIX; 16a. Grave O; 17a. Grave T; 18a, Forma 13; 192. Window;20a. Loculi; 21a. Niche; 22a. Forecourt;23a. Gully

293

Baer elevation Secon AB

Section CD

0

-"

Southem devon Mens del, JD Fic. 173 - Interior elevations of rock-cut cubiculum Tomb N. 83 (Π1.1.3). 1. Inscription IIa; 2. Demetria Inscription IIb; 3. Window; 4. Forma 13; 5. Grave4; 6. Forma 3; 7. Assemblage XXIX; 8. Inscription Ib; 9. Inscription Ia.

294

Sito de

Phase

Mens et ἀεὶ Jet

Fic. 174 - Sequence of development, loculus to cubiculum, Tomb N. 83; plan,N. 83 bis (IL.1.4; M123). ἴα, Earlier grave; 2a. Sarcophagus N. 83-Q; 3a. Sarcophagus lid in situ; 4a. Earlier steps 5a. Grave O; 6a. Grave T; 7a. Cubiculum; 8a. Window; 9a. Forma 3; 10a. Grave 10; 11a. Forma 13;12a, Murals;13a. Demetria grave; 14a. Rock-cut cistern; 19a. Later built grave; 16a. Sarcophagus lid upright; 17a. Conjectured boundary; 18a. Later steps; 19a. Later boundary wall

295

Fic. 175 - Location plan: rock-cut facade loculus Tomb N. 83-BF complex (IIL3.1), 1. Assemblage LXVIII; 2. Defined area N. 83-BM; 3. Defined area; 4. ForecourtN. 83-BL;5. Forecourt,

296

Fic. 177 - Tomb N. 83-BF built balustrade screen {ΠΠ.3.3}.

297

4

a

‘wl

Ψ

TERTE

n.

|}

Mens. dl γα Fic. 178 ~ Plan and elevation, rock-cut facade loculus Tomb N. 83-BF; N. 83-BF bis (013.3; 111.43). 1a. Sockets for block stelai; 2a. Limits of defined area; 3a. Stele sockets; 4a. Forecourt;

56. Built screen; 6a. Assemblage LXIIL; 7a. Assemblage LXIL, 8a. Assemblage LXI, 9a, Assemblage LX.

298

2

———

HE

Ales Rowe

Fic. 179 - Location plans: graves N. 83-A to F, N. 82-20; Enclosures N. 83-5, N. 85:0 (IIL5.1, 11.6.4, 17.1) 1. Assemblage XXVII-A; 2. Assemblage XXVIL-B; 3. Assemblage XXVIL.C; 4. Assemblage XXVIILB; 5. Assemblage XXX, XXXII, XXXIV, XXXVII, 6. Assemblage XXXI; 7. Assemblage XXVIIL-A; 8, Small table; 9. Sarcophagus lid; 10. Cut boundary line; 11. Assemblage XXXIII, 12. Assemblage XXXVII, 13. Assemblage XXXVI; 14. Stone blocking; 15. Chest sarcophagus N. 83-V; 16. Assemblage XLVII; 17. Assemblage XLIX, LIL, LV, LVI; 18. Assemblage XLVI; 19. Assemblage XXXV.

299

Fic. 180 - Location plan: graves N. 83-AT to AZ; Rowe's Day Book: burial in N. 83-AZ; EnclosureN. 83-W (IL8.12; IIL9.1). 1. Assemblage L; 2. Pir’; 3. Assemblage LII, LXXII; 4. Assemblage XLIV; 5. Assemblage XLIII; 6. Assemblage XLV. 7. Assemblage LIV; 8. Assemblage LVI; 9. Assemblage LVIII; 10. Sarcophagus Group; 11. Skull; 12. M. 529; 13. M. 528; 14. Boundary line; 15. Re-used sarcophagus lid; 16. Chest sarcophagus N. 83-V, 17. Steps; 18. Stone blocking; 19. Assemblage XXXIX-XLL

300

ΝΘΒΡ N.83 ΒΗ. Rowe 0)

No]

Rove(4)

a

Ex —]

ESTEE.

ü cec |

After Rove

Fic. 181 - Location plan: sarcophagus Enclosure N. 83-BK (II1.10.1). 1. Assemblage LXVII; 2. Sarcophagus blank; 3. Assemblage LIX, LXX; 4. Ste 6. Assemblage LXV; 7. Assemblage LXVI.

Assemblage LXIV;

301

Fic. 182 - Exposed in quarry chippings, 1956 (IIL10.1.3).

302

Fic, 183 - Sarcophagus N. 83-BI cleared, 1956 (III.10.1-3).

303

THs iens

AIK T= quoe

Fic. 185 ~ Sarcophagus N. 83-B] cleared, 1956 (LIL10.1-3).

305

Fic. 186 - Enclosure N. 83-BK cleared, 1956 (1Π.10.1.3).

306

Fic. 187 -- Rowe's Day Book: position of burial artifacts, Sarcophagi N. 83-BH, N. 83:8] (III.102).

307

Fic. 188 - Suggested sequence of development N. 83-BK; Dixon's annotated sketch of sarcophagus group N. 83-BN to BU; position of burial artifacts from Sarcophagus N. 83-BT (1.104, 0111.12) 1. Low sarcophagi; 2. Defined arca; 3. Raised sarcophagi; 4. Assemblage LXXI; 5. Assemblage LXXIX; 6. Assemblage LXXX; 7. Assemblage LXXVIII; 8 AAA[.]ONI; 9. Assemblage LXXIIT; 10. Assemblage LXXVI.

Fig, 189 - Tomb N. 82 quarry forecourt looking south-east {Π|.12.3}.

309

FiG. 190- Location plan: quarry forecourt complex, cubiculum Tomb N. 82 {ΠΠ.12.1}. 1. Rowe's niche;2. Steps; 3. Assemblage LXXIV, LXXVI, LXXXI, XC.

310 "jede

N82 (Ot

Fic. 191 - Dixon's sketch of cubiculum, Tomb N. 82; interior plan and elevation (IL121,3). 1. Arcosolium A; 2. Arcosolium B; 3. Grave D; 4. Grave C; 5. Assemblage XCIII.

31:

Fic. 192 - Enclosure N. 82-23 showing circular holes against step, 1957 (IL.133).

312

rM.

ELS ms

S REA

=

mm)

- ΡΞ Ξ Sets)

Fic. 193 - Location plan: EnclosureN. 82-23; partly destroyed sarcophagus EnclosuresN. 82-24,N. 82-1 (013.1, 1.14.1, 115.1), 1a. Duct; 2a. Square cover; 3a. Assemblage CIX, CXI, CXIII; 4a. Rowe's niche; 5a. Quarry; 6a. Later quarried area; 7a. Assemblage XLVIIT, 8a. Assemblage XLII; 9a. Assemblage LI; 10a, Cairn N. 822; Ma. Assemblage LXXV; 12a. Drain.

313

Fic. 194 ~Tomb N. 81 in enclosure (IIL.163)

p o!

[saper] soie]

3

314

N. SY bie. | Tomb Tomb -sfbie.

r7]

2

Mens. et ἀεὶ JetD

Fic. 195 - Location plan: sarcophagus EnclosureN. 81-AN complex; TombsN. 81, N. 81 bis (IIL16.1,). 1. Stelai sockets; 2. Assemblage CXV, CXXIX; 3. Steps;4. Arcosolia; 5. Pillar 6. Chamber sarcophagi

315

Fic. 196 - Tomb N. 81-A unexcavated, looking east, 1956 (IIL17.3)

316

FiG. 197 - Tomb N. 81-O and Loculus Sarcophagus N. 81-UU, cleared, 1957 (111.183).

317

|

Core daba removed Section AB Bersde Set

90017

°

2m

Mes cid Jet

Fic. 198 — Plans and sections: Tomb N. 81-A, Tomb N. 81-O; suggested sequence of development,N. 81-O (IILI7.1, 3; IIL18-4). 1. Niche; 2. Inscription; 3. Assemblage LXXXVIII; 4. Assemblage LXXXII; 5. Assemblage LXXXV, VII; 6. Assemblage LXXXIV; 7. Assemblage LXXXVI, IX; 8. Drafted recess; 9. Assemblage LXIX; 10, Forecourt N. 81-b; 11. Upper EnclosureN. 81-B; 12. Floor grave; 13. Assemblage XCVI, CIL, 14. Preliminary arrangement; 15. Chamber cut; 16. Intended arrangement; 17. Loculus sarcophagus; 18. Substitute arrangement; 19. Grave,

318

Fic. 199 - Temple Tomb N. 77 looking cast, Deutsches Afrikakorps 1942 (ΠΠ.19.1).

319 na | TombstO |

Mens εἰ ἀεὶ Jer

Fic. 200 - Location plans: Tombs N. 81-0, N. 77; plan and elevation, temple Tomb N. 77 (IL18.1; 193). 1. Remains of temenos wall; 2. Euthynteria; 3. Small sockets; 4. Stele socket; 5. Lifting boss

Fic. 201 -- SarcophagusN. 81-UU area before excavation, 1956 {ΠΠ.18.3}.

321

Mer Rowe

Fic, 202 -- Location plan: Upper and Lower Enclosures N. 81-B with Dixon's sketch (IIL20.1; 11212) 1. Upper Enclosure N. 81-B; 2. Assemblage XCVIII; 3. Lower Enclosure N. 81-B; 4. Assemblage XCI, XCV, CVIIE; 5. Large table; 6. Assemblage CVII; 7. Assemblage CV; 8; Steps; 9. Forecourt N. 81-b; 10, Assemblage C-Cl; 11. Assemblage LXIX, LXXXII; 12. Upper terraced floor; 13. Assemblage XCII, XCIV; 14. Assemblage XCVII, XCIX; 15. Assemblage XXXIII; 16. Assemblage CU.

322

pins in Frman and Dixon Archives Note dein οἱ afc base on original photographic Neal ann 8

Mage.

MO,

MU

Fic. 205 - Location plan: Enclosures N. 81-BB, N. 81-KK; position of burial artifacts from Sarcophagi N. 81-RR, AD and AC (IL 22.1; IIL23.1-2) 1.Assemblage CX; 2.ΣΑΣ; 3. Assemblage CXIL 4.Small table; 5.]AYXIZIE [?PIAO]KOMAK; 6. Assemblage CVI, CXVII; 7. Upper level 8. Assemblage CXIX; 9. Assemblage CXXIII; 10. Assemblage CXIV, CXVI, CXVIII, CXX; 11. Assemblage CXXI; 12. Lower level; 13. ΤΑΤΙΑΣ; 14. Assemblage CXXVIE, 15. After Rowe II Pl. 26c; 16. Assemblage CXIX; 17. After Rowe II Pl. 26b; 18. Assemblage CXXIII; 19. Figurine; 20. Amphora fragments M. 1208a,b,c 21. Lamp;22. After RoweII PL 24b.

323

Fic. 205 - Sarcophagi, N. 81 cleared area looking north, 1957 (II1.25.1).

324

Fic. 206 - Location plans: complex of Enclosure N. 81-AB and Peripheral Group, Area N. 81 (Π|24.1; 1.25.1), 1. Assemblage CXXIT; CXXIV, CXXVI; 2. KA(P)TAIMEN (HZ); 3. Assemblage CXV; 4. Assemblage CXVIII, 5. AIAOXOZ; 6. Assemblage CIV; 7. False sarcophagus; 8. HPAILE; 9. Sarcophagus N. 81-(a.

1V.0.0 Introduction

The necropolis, according to Hyslop, was estimated to cover ‘50 square kilometers’, which the Bedouin stated in 1905 took six camel-hours to cross; this would be accurate, taking the average walking speed for a camel to be two miles an hour, based on Réné Caillié’s records." It has been explored by Europeans in the last three hundred years, but in the last two decades of the second millennium this vast cemetery, which has survived the vicissitudes of time and war, has begun to fall prey to destruction in the name of progress, with the spread within seven years of a concrete paradise of buildings covering most of the Eastern and sprawling over the Southern Necropolis. With the pressures of overpopulation, which in 1995 was estimated at 175,000 inhabitants, a sewage problem has developed, with Wadi bel Ghadir, called by Porcher ‘the valley of verdure! being utilised as an open sewer which has filtered through the limestone and polluted the cool, refreshing, sweet water of the Apollo Fountain, which in 630 B. C. had persuaded the original immigrants to settle there and to found the prosperous city of Cyrene. The possibility that the lower plateau, overlooked by the Northern Necropolis, might become the next area of development, is already being talked about and buildings are appearing. This would mean that the wellknown tombs would be under even deeper threat from the destruction and vandalism which has already commenced; for example, the smashing of marble sarcophagus lids in a tomb in the Westem Necropolis. Cooking fires are being made against tomb facades and sarcophagus lids shattered to extract burial artifacts to feed the European antiquities market, examples of which, still retaining traces of the distinctive terra rossa of Cyrenaica, now appear on occasions in antique shops within a few minutes’walk of the British Museum. The rock-cut tombs studied by Alan Rowe have also fallen victim to vandalism, such as the Archaic tombs where initials are now hacked into facades and columns (Fig. 74), the murals in Tomb N. 83 recently scribbled over, with the obliteration of the Demetria inscription’? (Fig. 173) and large sarcophagus lids N. 83-BI and BJ smashed (Fig. 181). In 1963 Beschi excavated two

tombs, marking the end of European archaeological work in the necropolis (Figs. 157, 240). This is now undertaken professionally by the present tomb robber, whose work has noticeably increased in the last five years (Fig. 215). In 1998 it was seen that the thick lids of the hitherto undisturbed arcosolium burials in the Stappard Tomb had been vandalised by the pickaxe (Fig. 235), and in a tomb recorded by Porcher the dividing walls between the loculi had been smashed (Fig, 27 Tomb F)^ An attempt had been made to remove from a unique tomb mural at least two of the * ? ? *

Hogarth (1905), 95; Caillié (1830) Vol.2, 262. Bacchielli (1992), 18-22 Fig. 14. Beschi (1972), 150-168, 186, 196 Figs. 10:23, 40-50. Santucci (1996) Tav. VITIb.

328

standing onlookers beside a lyre player, destroying them in the process (Fig. 8 Tomb D)? At the same time, the bulldozer was levelling any trace of tombs within the current area of New Shahat's development around Tombs 5. 104-S. 115, and in May 2000 the ancient road to Balagrae was being widened and prepared for surfacing, putting under threat the parallel ancient Greek road, as well as a large number of tombs, meaning the Nemesis of the last necropolis in Cyrenaica (Figs. 17, 207). In March 2002 two marble aniconic half-figures claimed to be from Lebanon surfaced on the market, destined for an antiques fair in New York. These bore the unmistakable signs of recent discovery in the Cyrene area, and probably came to light during this recent road construction, although tragically their true context will never be known. Brave attempts have been made by the Antiquities Department to rescue archaeological material by saving marble iconic half-figures with their inscribed statue bases, sarcophagi and block stelai, but the Department is seriously hampered by the difficulty of obtaining essential photographic and excavation equipment, even measuring tapes and finds bags, which a modern archaeologist regards as basic. For example, the recent rescue excavation of a buried, undisturbed, wide chamber loculus tomb near the Shahat crossroads at the site of Wadi el Aish was carried out in a few hours by the luxury of candlelight (Fig. 226). The congestion affecting monuments still remaining in New Shahat is illustrated by tombs, never recorded by Cassels, now standing amidst dumped litter and domestic rubbish and surrounded by concrete houses or blocks of flats. Temple Tomb E. 75, originally published by Chamoux, lost its identity on the landscape and was to be found on a piece of waste ground against the concrete wall of a works depot, but has disappeared in the last three years.“ Surface litter is nothing as it can protect - it can be cleared away, but damaged facades endure. Charcoal scribble could perhaps be carefully removed, but the sight of graffiti on a wall breeds more, which only time will turn into spraycan art, and that would be there for ever. [Since writing these words I have noticed that this downward trend has now tragically begun in Wadi Haleg Shaloof, in Pacho's painted Tomb N. 22 (Figs. 34, 235)].

1V.0.1 Necropolis Morphology The first serious architectural study of the tombs this century was undertaken by Benedetto Maioletti, who published three fundamental articles in 1930-31 on a variety of tombs, with descriptions of burials connected with stele monuments (Fig. 48). The scope of his study was, however, insufficient to form a classification, but in 1945 C. G. C. Hyslop outlined the Your outstanding types’ a limited attempt which was a forerunner of that tackled by Cassels ten years later.” His classification was based on examples in the Northern Necropolis, as follows: a. Rock-cut chambers underground b. Shrine tombs or mausolea c. Circular mausolea ἃ Stone sarcophagi These classifications were known by Alan Rowe, who possessed the original typescript copy. Hyslop described under Type a. the rock-cut archaic Tombs N. 2-8 together with the Roman tombs Rowe's M. 7 and N. 83 (Figs. 60, 74-76, 79, 172-173), all of which were eventually surveyed > Pacho (1827)PL L; Bacchielli(1993a), 93 Fig. 15; (2003), 300-301 Fig. 14C. © Chamoux (1953), 290 PL. IX,3 7 Hyslop (1945), 46-49.

329

by Rowe, but the more prevalent Hellenistic loculus tombs with Doric and Ionic facades, dismissed as ‘narrow passage types’, were later studied more fully by both Burton Brown and Rowe (Figs. 45, 64, 116). Hyslop's Type b. is based on examples lining the southern road on the present site of New Shahat, which no longer survive, but he made reference to other examples, Rowe's M. 8, and probably those at Ras el Hilal (Figs. 107, 272)? His Type c. definition was confined entirely to Rowe's Tomb M. 15 (Fig. 96), whereas Rowe's study of circular tombs in his 1952 campaign and subsequent typology immediately highlighted Hyslop’s limitations.'? Rowe divided the tombs into five types: Typel Primitive circles of spaced stones Rowe’s Tombs M.9-13 (Fig. 157) Typell Primitive circles of low horizontal masonry M.4 (Fig. 149) Type II Truncated cone of masonry on high podium M.14 (Fig. 158) Type IV Large vertical drum with flat conical roof: masonry Mghernes" (Fig. 271) Type V Large vertical drum with rock-cut chamber below M.15 (Fig. 96)

Rowe’s typology is flawed because Type II has a recessed horizontal moulding on the orthostats, indicating a more developed Hellenistic structure, rather than ‘primitive’. In Type ΠῚ the podium is of natural rock. Types IV and V are related, but the subterranean chamber below the latter is a later addition, and the tomb itself contains an earlier truncated temple tomb in the interior, which is a unique feature. In Type V no mention is made of the diagnostic entablature on M. 15 being also adopted on shrine tombs M. 6 and M. 8, which are in the same Ionic order (Figs. 96, 107, 123) No attempt was made to classify his rectangular tombs, other than to place temple tomb M. 2 with his ‘mastaba’ M. 5 (Figs. 124, 144). In his excavation of Tomb E. 160 Rowe did not recognise its similarity to M. 5 (Figs. 133, 144), both in construction and arrangement, nor did he note the similarities of the adjoining circular Tomb E. 161 to his M. 15 (Figs. 96, 135). Hyslop in his Type d. makes no reference to Maioletti’s ‘sarcofago monolitico’, but refers to an inscribed stone being placed on top (Fig. 258). Rowe did not realize that all of the recorded ‘stepped tombs’ M. 17-19 had been rebuilt by Maioletti before 1931 (Figs. 55-56), and in his study of them he isolated one type, comparing it with an example in Alexandria (Fig. 274), but ignored the more common type, represented in the facade of Tomb N. 17 (Figs. 259, 272). John Cassels recorded and mapped all the most significant tombs in 1953-54 by fieldwalking 18 square kilometres in the extensive necropolis, but his fieldwork did not extend to the area beyond the crossroads at New Shahat, where so many of the ancient tombs have disappeared (Figs. 17, 207). The problem was that the tombs were sometimes inaccessible, often in ruins, halfburied or concealed by undergrowth, or the interiors filled with rainwater, and he had rapidly to identify and classify tombs in difficult conditions, leading to inaccuracies in his interpretation which he realised that only archaeology could correct. His notebooks, containing records of tombs now destroyed, provide a wealth of unpublished information and have thus dramatically increased in value and importance. He formed the tombs into four major classifications, differentiating more clearly than Hyslop between built and rock-cut tombs: Cassels C. B R 8 * » ? "

Hyslop (1945) PL. 1X2. Hyslop (1945) PL IX, Rowe I, 4-10 Fig. 1 Rowe,9n. 2

Circular built tombs Rectangular built tombs Rock-cut tombs Sarcophagi

(Hyslop (Hyslop (Hyslop (Hyslop

o) b) a) d)

330

These are subdivided with regard to their various structural elements, but he realised that the numerous rock-cut tombs needed to be further sub-classified by including the related burial arrangements and demonstrating variations in their architectural elements. Cassels did not cite the existence of Ptolemaic tombs in the necropolis with affinities with those in Alexandria, other than the built monuments, indicating the difficulty in detection. In his 1955 publication he relied on the most up-to-date archaeological information from Rowe, and of the eighty tombs discussed in the text, a quarter were either excavated or surveyed by Rowe already, or in subsequent campaigns.” Richard Tomlinson followed in March 1956, working under the same conditions as Cassels, and in three weeks created his own alternative and more detailed classification on the architectural merits of the archaic Hellenistic and some later tombs. The natural erosion and unfortunate vandalism that have occurred over the last half century make his important descriptions all the more valid, and this is why some of them are quoted here. His Classes A-O seem to follow this order: Classes A-B CaselsR — Rocl-cut porticoed chamber tombs Rock-cut unporticoed chamber tombs Class C Partially isodomic-built chamber loculus tombs Classes D-E Completely isodomic-built chamber loculus tombs Classes F-G Completely isodomic-built facade loculus tombs Class H Class I Circular isodomic-built tombs Cassels C Circular orthostat-buile tombs Classes J-K Apsidal orthostat-built tombs Class L Cassels ΒΟ Rectangular isodomic-built temple tombs Class M Rectangular panelled orthostat-built shrine and temple tombs Class N Cassels $ — Rock-cut sarcophagi Class O He also encountered problems in this classification with: “Tombs that do not fall into any class (‘unclassified’) and ‘Tombs which, owing to destruction etc. cannot be classified. These also include forecourt tombs, which have their forecourts silted, obscuring the burial arrangements which distinguish between classes D, E, F andH, or where my notes are insufficient. (Class?). The reason for this was the diverse nature of the burial practices on which he tried to impose his architectural framework, but he was able to identify a new unrecognised tomb type, the false facaded tombs of his Class G (Fig. 231).? Tomlinson, because he was not confined by Cassels’ classification, studied many tombs which were omitted by him, especially in the Southern and Eastern Necropoleis where so much destruction has since occurred, and recorded, sometimes in minute detail, their architectural elements. Nine years later King Idris announced his new Housing Scheme to the people of the Kingdom of Libya, spelling the beginning of the end of the ancient necropolis." At the Benghazi Conference in March 1968, Professor Sandro Stucchi pointed out that in the textbooks on Greek and Roman architecture, the chapter dealing with the Cyrenaica was missing, basing his statement on the fact that Maioletti’s works nearly forty years earlier were the only published articles on the subject.” This resulted, eighteen years later, in his classic work 3 © ?* ?

Cassels (1955), 9-22 Pls. IVa-b, Va, Vila, VIlla-c, XIa-d, XIlIIa. Tomlinson (1967), 241-256 Pls. 44-47. Annane (1968), 12-13, 120-139. Stucchi (1968), 223-232 Pls. LX.

331

"Architettura Cirenaica’, which also included a part on tombs but relied ostensibly on previously published works.“ In December the Master Plan of development for New Shahat was published, to which Professor Stucchi had access, galvanising him to study the Eastern and Southern Necropoleis, concentrating on the architectural aspect of the tombs rather than their morphology and funerary archaeology (Fig. 207)." Until 1994 his successor, Professor Lidiano Bacchielli, studied the tombs previously recorded by Pacho and by Rowe for their Hellenistic and Roman murals, which have since been either defaced or removed (Figs. 293-294). Unfortunately, since the death of these two distinguished Italian professors, their papers are at present unavailable, leaving those of Cassels and Tomlinson to provide our current knowledge on those portions of the necropolis. Although their outline classifications are far from perfect, one must accept the fact that, until now, no attempt has since been made to build on the original definitive works of the two Englishmen. Rowe had intended to initiate a programme of tomb-planning in 1959 which, if it had come to fruition, would have provided a diagnostic classification of tomb types, a fundamental element which, together with the study of sarcophagi, was lacking in Cassels’ published gazetteer (L2.4).* IV.0.2 The New Classification

Rowe’s archaeological campaigns provided the basis on which to fulfil, in this and the following Chapter, his proposed 1959 tomb-planning project and to attempt a positive morphology by surveying, measuring and planning those tombs which are relevant to his primary work. It is necessary to adopt the framework of Cassels’ four main classified types in order to be compatible with his original work, while accepting that my view of the evidence will differ because I have been studying the funerary archaeology of the interiors and their related burial practices, rather than the spectacular external architecture. Definitive examples have been isolated from those excavated and surveyed by Rowe to form models or templates of the basic tomb types, and previously studied and excavated tombs, as outlined in Chapter I, are also used in order to complete the framework. While studying their morphology it became apparent, especially for the rock-cut "^ Stucchi (1975), 38-43, 70-86, 149-192, 316-318 Figs. 27-32, 56-81, 123-184, 329-330. 7? Shahat Report on the Master Plan produced by Doxiadis Associates, December 1968, prepared for the Government of the Kingdom of Libya (Fig. 207) Page 25 paragraph 40: ‘Actually the Necropolis of Cyrene is one of the most extensive cemeteries of tbe ancient world, and covers many square miles’. ‘both sides of the road to Susab, on the slope of the escarpment and contains some of the fest. tombs: Page 127: Master Plan shows a triangle of development up to the crossroads which will cover most of the area of the Southern Necropolis and part of the Eastern. Page 145 paragraph 347: ‘The archaeological area, as defined by the ancient city wall, should be fenced and controlled, Any structure not related to the antiquities should be removed so as to permit the exploration and the proper development of the whole ancient ity area’ Paragraph 348: ‘Similar measures should be taken for the Necropolis. Shahat Development feasibility study by Juan Andres Sienra Cock architect for municipality of Shahat, October 1978: Page 16 Appendix ‘It is important to point out that this city is builded around and over the ruins of Cyrene. This ruins are am unique and very valuable treasure and at tbe same time an enormous moral responsibilty. Inthe other band the devel‘opment of the area is an economic and social requirement. The big transformations of the environment that tbe development is can destroy a lt of tbe ruins. This should not bappend in Shahat because the ruins are not a brake of the develop‘ment but they can be a very important factor of it. On the proposal some areas are Rept free from building as archeological sites and isolated ruins are preserved on green areas. In both cases the ruins are incorporated as part of the city. This use of the rests of Cyrene as parts ofthe new city will give to Shahat a very interesting and particular character. At the same time the ruins of Cyrene will e preservated for the future. ? Burns Arch. Cyr. folder pt. 2 fols. 37, 67 (143).

332

tombs, whose permutations are endless, that the unfinished or altered examples gave the key to the main sequences of tomb development in Cyrenaica, and can be used as a guide in working out their chronological order. The difficulties experienced by Tomlinson, outlined earlier, illustrate the need for this alternative approach, studying the tomb interiors for the various systems of arrangement and deposition of the intended burials, while being aware of the influences of Cyrenaican funerary archaeology, subsequent development and alterations into other methods of burial practice. In this one can use Rowe's archaeological work as a tangible record on which to build a datable framework As Tomlinson recognised, one has to take into account a provincial architecture which has its own interpretation of the pure Classical orders, with influences belonging to regional architectural styles from elsewhere. Previously unconsidered square structures, mainly periboloi, omitted by Cassels, have also been noticed, and are the subject of recent work by Luca Cherstich (Figs. 246, 252)" 1V.0.3 Formation and Development

There are three main approaches to tomb morphology of which one has to be aware: unfinished works (a) where the intended scheme can be recognised but was never completed; (b) adapted tombs where the original scheme has been modified in favour of a different method of burial; and (c) completed works which stand in their primary condition. a. Unfinished Works The Archaic tombs in all cases have completed burial chambers, but the facades were apparently cut later, as in Rowe’s Tomb N. 2 where a line of sockets was intended for a sill on which to build a superstructure, and Rowe’s Tomb N. 9 where the Doric capitals, intended to be in the round, were left unfinished (Figs. 74, 76-78). This procedure changed when the loculus system was adopted, as the facades were quarried and built first. Many rock-cut loculus tombs thoughout the Northern Necropolis are unfinished, as clearly demonstrated by a pair of facade loculus tombs which show four entrances in each for intended loculi which remain uncut, except for the quarrying of one primary loculus in Tomb N. 224 (Fig. 219). This is well represented by Rowe's Tomb N. 401 where the forecourt had been cut and the free-standing isodomic facade built, but the small, low-ceilinged interior was in the early stages of being quarried for an eventual large chamber loculus system (Figs. 101, 224, 226). A graphic illustration of this is Tomb N. 357, which has a finished rock-cut facade, but a later inner chamber shows quarryman’s channelling trenches cut vertically at intervals around the walls from floor to ceiling (Fig. 224). In Tombs N. 181 and N. 192, intended chamber loculus entrances were left as unfinished surfaces on the walls, and in Tomb N. 83-BF bis a loculus was in the early stages of being quarried (Figs. 178, 226, 228). In galleried chamber loculus Tomb N. 150 only a few at the far end had been cut as they were required (Fig. 229).

b. Adapted Tombs At the rear of long chamber loculus Tomb N. 149 is a later quarried chamber with a bank of plain square loculi entrances which in appearance are identical to those of the Tomb N. 364 complex (Figs. 228, 234). They would seem to be the equivalent of the sepulchres cut at the rear of Cassels (1955), 22; Cherstich (2002) Thesis for Chieti University,

333

facade loculus Tomb N. 89 which are the same height, and those in Tombs N. 131 and N. 258 which are standing height (Fig. 233). Roman funeral bust niches above the entrance of a Hellenistic rock-cut tomb are a primary indication of the tomb being host to later burial practices. The Archaic chamber tombs were more prone to have ossuary niches cut in them as, for example, Rowe's Tombs N. 2 and N. 4, which may have a Semitic or Christian origin (Fig. 262). Existing Hellenistic tombs were later adapted, as Rowe’s Tomb N. 83 where the facade loculus system was unsuitable for the new form of burial practice which had come into vogue; the interior was destroyed and replaced by an up-to-date Roman arcosolium cubiculum system (Fig. 174). Rowe’s Tomb N. 5 burial chamber, for example, became a host accommodating arcosolia, which occur in some wide chamber loculus tombs (Figs. 80, 237).

«c. Completed works The Tomb of Grenna is the first tangible evidence to appear in the Hellenistic necropolis of ἃ Roman purpose-built tomb which has not adapted an earlier rock-cut tomb. The interior has three arched recesses containing large marble sarcophagi, forming the precursor of a combined sarcophagus and recess to form triple arcosolia in a cubiculum system, as represented by the Stappard Tomb which also has an antechamber (Figs. 234-235). Rowe's arcaded cubiculum Tomb M. 7 has five arcosolia and two cinerarium niches, but has no antechamber (Fig. 236). IV.1.0 Rock-cut tomb configurations (Figs. 224-225) The classification in Cassels’ fieldnotes consisted originally of five main interiors, A ‘w. porch’, B ‘w. chamber off which burial spaces open’, C. ‘direct into burials’, D ‘chamber w. sarcs around and E ‘Roman late’ ”

In the publication these five classifications were retained in the same order, with Cassels’ A consisting of only twenty-three porticoed examples. Realising this survey was not detailed, Rowe carried out his own, probably as a forerunner for his proposed 1959 tomb-planning project (Figs. 65, 68-73). Cassels’ B refers to chamber loculus systems such as Rowe's Tomb N. 10 and Tomb N. 17, with no reference to the radical Roman alteration within the latter, which he probably did not realise, being still in the early stages of his fieldwork (Figs. 225, 227). Cassels’ C was redescribed as: ‘with compartments having doors in the facade’, referring to facade loculi systems such as Rowe's Tomb M. 3 which shows a Doric entablature, but also including those with Tonic entablatures but without a metope-triglyph frieze, such as the adjacent Rowe's Tomb N. 198B (Fig. 116). Cassels’ D was redescribed as: ‘with burial spaces cut in the floor of the chamber’, which apparently refers to sarcophagus chambertombs (Figs.214-215). Cassels’ E, redescribed as ‘Roman interior’, covered primary examples of a cubiculum with arcosolia such as Rowe's Tomb N. 83, but ignored those which appeared as later alterations to earlier tombs, such as Tomb N. 165 which has an earlier galleried loculus system (Fig. 174). This classification does not clearly distinguish the fundamental sequence of development of these particular tombs, nor identify their related burial furniture, a question which was to some extent addressed by Tomlinson (Figs. 229, 236). My new classification of rock-cut tombs is based on Rowe's pioneer archaeological work and survey which investigated the burial practices used behind the facades. 7? Cassels Arch. Blue Book fol. 1. # Tomlinson’s personal papers: 1956 notebook, Classification fols. 149-157. % Cassels (1955), 22.

334

Cassels RA Porticoed Chamber Tombs TypesAtoB (Figs. 208-213) RB Chamber Loculus Tombs TypesGtoQ (Figs. 223-232) RC Facade Loculus Tombs TypesEtoF (Figs. 219-222) RD Sarcophagus Chamber Tombs — TypeC (Figs. 214-218) RE Cubiculum Tombs TypesUto W (Figs. 235-238) The portico tombs divide initially into tristyle and distyle examples with burial chambers, some of which contain low klinai indicating an open burial practice. These are primarily divided by their architectural styles into Archaic Doric Type A. 1 (Figs. 208-209), Aeolic, a term used here to distinguish Types A. 2-A. 3 (Figs. 208-211) and Archaic Ionic with a much more developed

facade decoration Type A. 4 (Figs. 212-213). The end of portico tombs in Cyrene is marked by the

introduction of a frieze on the entablature of Archaic Ionic Type B tombs (Fig. 212). Tombs of Type C are mainly cut in Wadi bel Ghadir, and are marked by the abandoning of the portico and the combining of the tomb entrance with the facade, also including a radical change in burial practice by having chamber sarcophagi, called by Tomlinson ‘bench sarcopbagi’ in the interiors instead of klinai (Figs. 214-218). There is an indication that naiskoi and niches for aniconic busts were in vogue, cut above entrances in the facades (Figs. 253-254). A glimpse of another more significant system of burial is demonstrated by Type D, which is a subterranean peristyle tomb with a small burial chamber which Cassels was unaware existed (Fig. 217)

The facade loculus system, a fundamental change in burial practice, is fully established in ‘Type E and shows a diversity of architectural styles in the entablature and screen above, which includes burial furniture of either aniconic or iconic statuary and inscribed stelai, and there is a defined area behind the facade (Figs. 219-220). This was emulated in Type F, where the entablature mainly consisted of an Ionic frieze and a decorative screen for the same purpose as before. The facade became much plainer with the abandoning of the frieze in some examples, and a simplification of the screen into an orthostat-built revetment capped by a coping stone, which in some cases had a sill for burial furniture (Figs. 220-222). Pedimented portico tombs of Type G show a square chamber with loculi cut around the interior, and may represent a transition in burial practices, which in some cases could have begun as an adaption. This burial system is certainly in use with Type H and noticeably in association with sarcophagi (Fig. 223). Tombs which have an isodomic-built facade with Doric entablature and screen with its burial furniture, possibly including a defined area, are represented by Type I, while those of Type J have an Tonic entablature, both types showing the same internal burial practice as before (Figs. 224-225). Chamber loculus systems of Type K show a wide chamber in front of the loculi and a Doric facade with columns, entablature, metope-diglyph frieze and possibly a pediment above with no defined area behind (Fig. 225). Those in Type L have pilasters in antis and a Doric entablature with screen above and defined area behind (Figs. 226-227), while those of Type M have an Tonic entablature, but otherwise are essentially the same (Fig. 228). A milestone in tomb development was reached when it was realised that cutting a long chamber loculus system would give an opportunity to increase the number of loculi, and to vary their length, as demonstrated in Type N (Fig. 228). This was perfected when the long chamber was increased in length, often being hewn deep into the hillside or being completely subterranean, and the system eventually developed into a Type O galleried loculus tomb which either had a rock-cut or built facade or a decorative portico (Figs. 229-230). Porticoed chamber loculi of Type P with triple entrances and a combination of various chamber loculus systems include Tomlin-

335

son’s false fagaded tombs (Fig. 231). The unporticoed chamber loculus tombs of Type Q belong to the tomb morphology of those above in Type P (Fig. 232). These seem to form the last of the late Hellenistic loculus tombs in Cyrene, and after this our knowledge of the burial practices becomes unclear. There were alterations inside the earlier tombs, indicating the new practice of cutting small chambers, identified here as sepulchres or columbaria, which probably represent the Ptolemaic influence in Type R (Figs. 233-234). A further change in burial practice is demonstrated in the Roman period by the niches cut in rock-cut tombs for the purpose of installing marble portrait busts, which points to the tombs having become hosts probably for inhumation burials, indicated by the associated burial artifacts, such as the glass balsamaria found in Rowe's Tomb M. 3, for example (Fig. 328). This would seem to be followed by the rock-cut hypogeum system where imported marble sarcophagi were installed in large recesses in Type 5 tombs (Fig, 234). This system may be contemporary with Type T painted camerae which also probably contained marble sarcophagi, but the latter would not be found in triclinium recesses which are mainly small and were probably used in funerary rituals for a nearby larger tomb (Fig. 235). The Type U cubiculum system with arcosolia, which includes an antechamber, was the last major development to occur in the rock-cut tombs (Figs. 235, 237). An alternative in Type V was the addition of an open arcaded antechamber with marble sarcophagi (Fig. 236), which was eventually represented as a blind arcade in Type W with arcosolia (Figs. 236, 238). The cutting of formae in the floors of various types of earlier tombs and in cubicula, and the use of cremation niches under Type X seem to be the final halimark of later adaptions (Fig. 238). Jewish tombs and their burials are elusive, but could be represented by ossuary niches in the walls. Evidence for Byzantine graves in the necropolis is only indicated by an isolated burial in a later adapted tomb (Fig. 299), and these are more likely to have been graves covered by slabs near the church. The only post-Byzantine artifact known from a burial, an 8th century Islamic glass coin weight from Rowe’s Tomb M. 3, possibly has its origins in the nearby caravan route, and may be from an intrusive Islamic burial (Figs. 116, 329). IV.L1 Cyrene Types A-B Tombs Portico Chamber (Figs. 208-212) Type A. 1 (Figs. 208-209a) The only four tristyle in antis Archaic Doric tombs with no entablature have four phases of development (Figs. 67, 77). The earliest, Tomb N. 5, influenced the proportions of later adjoining Tombs N. 6-7, which are the only examples to have fluted columns sitting on a square cut outline of a basestone (Figs. 70-71, 287). The latest, Tomb N. 9, is unfinished around the capitals, and its column shafts were perhaps intended to have flutes which were never cut. The prepared surface above the capitals could with ease accommodate an entablature and pediment which were painted rather than being subsequently cut (Fig. 68). All these burial chambers are completely empty, indicating that any furnishings introduced into them were perishable, in contrast to the low klinai found, for example, in Tomb N. 3 mentioned below (Fig. 295). The column shafts and capitals of Tomb N. 7 are similar to those of Archaic Doric Chapiteau D found in Delphi, where the base of the echinus shows fillets instead of an astragal. In both cases the shafts have eighteen flutes, but the Delphi example is suggested to be the upper half of a two-part column, indicated by the empolion on the shaft base.” Type A. 2 (Figs. 208-209b) The five Acolic tombs, mainly bordering the ancient roads, are tristyle in antis in Wadi Haleg Shaloof (Figs. 67, 72-73, 78) with pillars resting on the cut outline > Coste-Messeliére (1942-1943), 50 Fig. 11

336

of a square basestone (Fig, 288), a feature already mentioned, whereas in Wadi bel Ghadir and ‘Ain Hofra there are only distyle in antis examples. The decorative capitals were cut on the external face with a palmette echinus and characteristic comma-like volutes which spring from the outer edge of the pilaster below the eye, rather than from the pilaster middle, as shown by the Selinunt capital (Fig. 286). The exceptions are Tombs N. 2-3 which were left with plain capitals, suggesting that the palmette and volute motifs were painted on them, as with painted votive capitals found in the Athenian Acropolis (Fig. 284). The epistyle on Tomb N. 2 shows a row of weathered quarry. man’s wedge-slots, possibly for an intended upper dressed sill for some form of built superstructure (Figs. 73, 78). Professor Stucchi’s reconstruction of pedimented facades is in principle correct but was not implemented, and was only intended for Acolic Tombs N. 2-4. This is based on. distyle Tomb W. 15 with flat voluted capitals which is cut at the bottom of the scarp, and because of this was able to be given a rock-cut pediment. The raking cornice is a plain outline but the epistyle shows a decorative string course of bead and double reel with tongues in low relief. A comparative example of voluted capital is shown on the unfinished Aeolic distyle Tomb E. 24, terraced into the hillside at Ain Hofra.” The burial chambers of tristylein antis tombs such as Tomb N. 2 are empty, as the Archaic Doric tombs, while Tomb N. 3 contains the first evidence of decorative rock-cut klinai around the walls, recalling plain examples in the tomb ‘di Menecrate’ (Figs. 265, 295), but this characteristic in Tomb N. 4 is uncertain as the floor was lowered in the middle when it was adapted for later Semitic burials. The distyle in antis Tomb E. 24 was intended to have two small burial chambers, only one of which was cut, and was eventually adapted in the Roman period by the removal of the chamber wall. Tomb W. 44 was intended to have two separate outer burial chambers, based on Tomb W. 37; only one was fully cut, the other being left as an entrance and later cut with a loculus system (Figs. 208, 210).

Type A. 3 (Figs. 210-211) More prolific and dispersed around the necropolis are eleven

examples similar in appearance to Acolic distyle in antis tomb facades, but without a basestone to support the pillars, and in some cases fronted by a stylobate. The rectangular block capitals are referred to in German as ‘sattel-bolz’, and later by Stucchi as ‘capitelli parallelepipedi’, noticeably heavier in some examples such as Tomb W. 33 and lighter in others such as Blundell's Tomb D, which may indicate their development (Fig. 210). They support an epistyle, mainly cut just below the edge of the rocky scarp, above which is usually evidence, in the form of a dressed sill, for a built superstructure. Two very modest examples of heavy block capitals occur on Tomb N. 405, which shows an epistyle with an inscription, originally cut in a raised position under a now fallen overhang, and on a similar unregistered tomb to the east. These are both cut among Type C. 3 tombs and may be the earliest examples (Fig. 215). Facades with the usual heavy block capitals such as the raised Tomb N. 416 are capped by a plain built cornice on the epistyle, implying the possibility for a built superstructure,® confirmed by Tomb W. 33 with a lightly cut silhouette of a pediment above the epistyle, which gives an austere appearance suggesting that there was painted decoration of an architectural nature (Fig. 25). The nearby Tomb W. 41 does not produce evidence for a superstructure as the sill is badly weathered (Figs. 13, 16). However, a superstructure is possible on Tomb S. 69, studied by Luca Cherstich, where to obtain the requisite height for a facade the tomb is terraced into the flat plateau, a process which created a long forecourt bordering the ancient road to Balagrae.” A variation involving light block capitals which may indicate a later development is shown by Tomb W. 37, which has a stylobate in front of the portico, but the # Stucchi (1975), 30 Fig. 28; Bonacasa (2000), 182. ® Stucchi (1975), 21 n. 7, 40-41 Fig. 32b. * Cherstich (2002), 174-179 Τανν. 89.91. ® Oliverio (1951), 282 Fig. 61; Stucchi (1975), 175 Fig. 166.

337

existence of a built superstructure cannot be proven here, or for the similar Tomb W. 49. In contrast, Blundell Tomb D, which seems to be later, shows evidence for a dressed sill on the epistyle, making more plausible the possibility that it had either a simple cornice or a built pediment (Figs. 26, 210). The proportions of the pilasters and light block capitals in the latter match the slightly smaller ones used for Type B Tomb W. 18, and may point to a similar specification and origin (Fig. 211). Another series which probably belongs to these has plain square pilasters lacking capitals, such as on the originally trstyle portico Tomb N. 37 at the head of Wadi Haleg Shaloof. This compares with the distyle Tomb W. 17 in Wadi bel Ghadir, which in turn is probably contemporary with Type A. 2 Aeolic Tomb W. 15 nearby (Fig. 32). The tomb interiors display a variety of burial chamber systems which in Tomb N. 405 consists of two wall sarcophagi, whereas in Tomb W. 33 there are low klinai around the chamber walls with later graves cut in them, recalling those cut in Aeolic Tomb W. 15 (Figs. 208, 210). Tomb W. 37 differs by having two chambers side by side which are completely plain, resembling the interior of the nearby Type C. 4 Tomb W. 32, suggesting that they may be contemporary (Figs. 210, 217). The interior of Tomb W. 49 shows wall sarcophagi around the chamber and a smaller inner chamber, whereas Tomb S. 69 may originally have had a square chamber which has later been adapted and extended to have four sepulchral chambers, two of which have graves covered with slabs inserted in the floor on either side of the original door into the tomb. At the rear of Blundell Tomb D is a single wall sarcophagus, a feature more commonly found in Ionic facade sarcophagus chamber tombs like W. 22 of Type C. 12, suggesting in this case a later development (Figs. 214-215).

Type A. 4 (Figs. 212-213) There are only two examples, distyle in antis Rowe’s Tomb N. 8 (Figs. 68, 74) and tristyle in antis Tomb W. 48 in Wadi bel Ghadir (Figs. 11, 26). The cutting of Tomb N. 8, truncating the eastern anta of the latest Archaic Doric example, Rowe's Tomb N. 9, and also the insertion of Tomb W. 48 between Acolic Tombs W. 47 and 49 with block capitals, imply a later date for the type under discussion (Figs. 77, 79). The decorative facades of both these tombs show to some extent identical elements. The column shafts on Tomb W. 48 have twelve flutes with eighteen on the central one, which differs in number in comparison with Tomb N. 8 which has sixteen (Fig. 288). The Archaic Ionic capitals on Tomb N. 8 show a distinctive echinus with a double row of egg and dart, a deep curved cushion and an abacus above with an ovolo, while at the sides, and similarly on Tomb W. 48, the pulvinus shows a central balteus with three baguettes. In contrast, Tomlinson’s description of the flanking capitals of Tomb W. 48 reads: "The two side capitals are Ionic: band round top of shaft. Volute centres approximately over line of shaft. Abacus straight with the central one an ‘elaborate palm type capital. collar surmounted by palm section and circular band... This supports a rectangular section.. sides straight inclined. and an abacus’, overlooking the existence of pulvinus and balteus. In comparison, the Archaic Ionic capitals cut on Tomb N. 8 appear to be emulating the large, well-finished example used for Cyrene’s marble sphinx monument, dated with reservation 10 560-550 B. C., which shows the only other occurrence of a double echinus (Fig. 212).” Professor Stucchi thought the central palm capital of Tomb W. 48 was ‘di tipico sapore egittizzante’® ‘The lesbian cyma over a bead and reel astragal, used on the architrave and door cymatium of both Rowe's Tomb N. 8 and Tomb W. 48, recalls that used at Delphi on the architrave of the Treasury of Massalia and on the door cymatium of the Siphnian Treasury, the latter dated to ca. ® Tomlinson’s personal papers: 1956 notebook fol. 52. » Maioletti 1, 571 Tav. E; Stucchi (1975), 171 Figs. 153-155; Goodchild (1968), 192-196 Figs. 3-4 Tav. LXXI; White (1971),91 Figs. 5-7 PI. 10. ™ Stucchi (1975), 170-172 Figs. 154-155.

338

525 B. C. by an inscription." The pediments have a plain raking cornice and lesbian cyma on the rake of the tympanum of Tomb N. 8 with a cyma of tongues above. The shallow niche in the tympanum is most likely a later feature as it is a silhouette of a half-figure, similar to that on Tomb W. 22, rather than the bust outlines cut on aedicula tombs in Wadi Halag Stawat (Figs. 253-254). The interior of Tomb W. 48 shows individual low klinai and possibly later floor graves around the burial chamber, and Tomb N. 8 could have had a similar burial arrangement with klinai (Fig. 212). These tombs recall with reservation some with similar distyle or tristyle facades and burial chamber arrangements in Paphlagonia and Karia, which are probably earlier (Figs. 279, 281).

Cyrene Type B Tombs

‘Type B. 1 (Fig. 212) The unique Tomb W. 18 in Cyrene is raised above the ancient road surface with its facade cut at the top of the scarp (Figs. 4, 7). The steps between the facade pilasters no longer lead down to the ancient road as they have been truncated by the cutting, immediately below, of Tomb W. 20, which post-dates Tomb W. 18 as it is a Hellenistic wide chamber loculus tomb (Fig. 226).” The facade of Tomb W. 18 is significant as the decorative pilasters show what Stucchi called Archaic Ionic capitals, recalling those cut in the earlier Aeolic Tombs W. 15 and Rowe's Tomb N. 4" Tomlinson called these 'piers.. with flat Ionic capitals with incised decoration. Volute centres high, and outside the outer lines of the shaft. There are no oculi, the spiral merely tailing to an end, as in the Croesus temple at Ephesus. The sides and backs of the capital are plain’. The lack of pulvinus and balteus with baguettes emphasises their similarity to the block capitals of Tomb W. 33, implying a common origin, further indicated by the burial practices of wall sarcophagi and low klinai (Fig. 210). The Doric-style entablature has an Archaic Ionic metope-triglyph frieze, where the ‘triglyphs occur over antae, columns, and 1 (sic, 2) over each intercolumniation space’ and an architrave in low relief which has a regula with five cylindrical guttae, but shows no projecting comice course of mutules with guttae, having a plain, lightly-cut cornice which outlines the pediment without acroteria” The interior shows continuous low klinai around the walls, subsequently cut with graves, recalling Tomb W. 15 (Fig. 208). The tombis to some extent an anomaly, having clear Archaic characteristics in its location, its square pilasters and its burial practices, but conversely showing an entablature where the frieze is not truly Hellenistic but is unconventional, with the triglyphs not fully centred over the pilasters, and the lightly-cut capitals reflect the technique used on an Archaic capital in the British Museum, also with no balteus or pulvinus, which originated from the probable site of the Temple of Artemis Eukleia in Athens (information Neil Adams); its Archaic nature seems to confirm and consolidate Stucchi's opinion.“ IV.1.2 Cyrene Types C-D Tombs Facade chamber and subterranean chamber (Figs. 214-217)

In Wadi bel Ghadir is a panorama of diagnostic tomb morphology consisting of burial chambers with wall sarcophagi, Tombs W. 15, 17-18 breaking the continuity by being apparently earlier porticoed chamber tombs (Figs. 208, 210, 212) with later inserted loculus TombsW. 16, 19-20 being the exception (Fig. 226). This divides at first into two main Types C. 1-2, discussed more ?' ? » * » %

Tomlinson (19%), 94-96 Figs. 132-136, Siphnian and Massalia Treasuries, Goodchild (1971), 170 Abb. 137. Pacho (1827), 374.375 Pl. XLIII; Ghislanzoni (1915), 158 Figs. 76-77; Laronde (1987), 438 Fig. 173. Stucchi (1975), 170 Figs. 151-152. Tomlinson’s personal papers: 1956 notebook fols. 46-47. Brit. Mus. G. R Inv. 1843, 5-21, 23, BMC Sculp. 1, 443; Alzinger (1972-1975), 202 Abb. 38.

339

fully below. Following the latter Type C. 2, the tomb morphology and related facades become more diverse in their styles, starting with Tomb W. 33 and extending as far as W. 49 leading into Wadi Halag Stawat (Fig. 210). This consists of a series of tombs with mainly plain entrances, some showing a simple outlined pediment as the only embellishment, such as Tombs W. 38-39, which recall Tombs N. 142, 407 in appearance (Figs. 215, 223), interspersed by four examples of Acolic porticoed tombs (Fig. 210). More significant here are Tombs W. 44 and W. 48, both important comparative examples to Rowe's Tombs N. 4 and N. 8 overlooking Wadi Haleg Shaloof (Figs. 208, 212). In the Northern Necropolis two unregistered tombs in the vicinity of Tombs N. 274 and N. 276 have in the interior chamber loculus burial systems, although the facades are identical to Tomb 4 in the Tomb N. 405 group (Figs. 28, 215, 223). This group is the only indication of a development in tomb morphology from a theke in Tomb 1 to a facade loculus system in Tomb W. 28 (Figs. 214-215).

Type C. 1 (Figs. 214, 216) Tombs W. 2-14 facades are deeply cut into the rockface with a natural overhang, the entrances plain, some with slightly raised surrounds, and most of them with a simple cymatium with acroteria, either plain or with volutes. Some of these tombs have pilasters in antis which show crude, ill-proportioned Ionic capitals in comparison with those cut on Tomb W. 22. The facade of Tomb W. 7 differs from those of the adjoining tombs by having no pilasters, although its entrance is the same. On the left is what appears to be a primitive funerary shrine with a large rectangular niche H. 0. 88 W. 0. 46 D. 0. 27m. On the corresponding side are the remains of an unfluted half column in relief with an Archaic Ionic capital with abacus and plain echinus, total H. 2. 08m, a black line W. 10mm being used for outlining the volutes and for painting the eye.” It is the same height 2. 05m as the Ionic columns cut on Tomb W. 48, which is pedimented (Fig. 212). Because of its position and size the column on Tomb W. 7 points to its not being an architectural element, implying alternatively that this is a representation of a votive column. It has similarities to examples from Attica, one of which, although more developed by having a decorative echinus, has been dated 490-480 B. C. (Fig. 214).* On both sides of the entrance of Tomb W. 4 is an Ionic capital on a slender, straight pilaster in low relief, supporting an epistyle. ‘These closely resemble the pilasters sculpted on the Samos sarcophagus from the Aegean, but lack bases (Fig. 284). Tomb W. 8 has pilasters in antis and another between its two entrances, all supporting an epistyle. The capitals are plain, but each shows a scribe line for an abacus contained within its width and two lines below the echinus for an astragal.

Type C. 2 (Figs. 214-216) Tombs W. 22-32 facades are more developed and terraced into the rockface, their projecting door surrounds surmounted by a cymatium with acroteria cut in low relief, identical to those in the first type but lacking the overhang. They have broad pilasters in antis with three main types of Ionic capitals supporting an abacus and epistyle. In Tomb W. 22 Cassels recorded a distyle recessed facade with single pilasters between and in antis, united by the epistyle, which Di Valerio informs me is formed by a row of rock-cut sarcophagus cases which have lost their lids. The pilaster capitals have similarities in their profiles to those of W. 8, although, unlike the latter, the astragal is separated from the echinus by a necking. In turn, the capitals of W. 8 resemble those cut for Rowe's Acolic Tombs N. 2-4, although N. 3 shows Ionic volutes (Figs. 214, 288). Judging by the weathered condition of the sill on the epistyle, the tomb appears unlikely to have had a superstructure. A niche above the first entrance recalls the shape of that cut on Rowe's Tomb N. 8, which in this case points to an iconic bust being used (Fig. 254).” The composite 7 MaiolettI, 37 Tav. B bottom left ™ Raubitschek (1943), 18-19 Fig. ΤΙ. 7,6. » Beschi (1972), 146-147 Fig. 7 (sic) W. 142.

340

Tomb W. 28 is significant in its morphology, having a wall sarcophagus, with its sill supporting cover slabs, confined in a theke, primarily a loculus construction with a full-size entrance (Fig 215). Evidence for some superstructure is represented by a dressed sill W. 0. 40m on the epistyle, a feature also noticed on adjoining Tombs W. 25, 27 and 31,® and demonstrated by the rock-cut pediment on Tomb W. 21, or by the orthostat-built tympanum on an untraced tomb in Wadi bel Ghadir (Figs. 215, 217). The more common type of tomb facade is represented by Tomb W. 25 which has a plain entrance surround, still retaining one of its two plain blocking stones, with pilasters in antis. On Tombs W. 27-29 and 31 the pilaster capitals have identical profiles which, although more developed than those above, showing the outline of volutes which terminate not in an eye but as a hook which joins the echinus, with the astragal in low relief below a necking, indicate that these tombs and W. 25 may have a common date (Fig. 215). On Tomb W. 31 the door is identical to that in Tomb W. 7, while over the door cymatium a unique plain square framed naiskos H. 0. 88 W. 0. 90 D. 0. 25m encroaches into the epistyle. A three-sided drainage channel cut into the badly weathered sill immediately above it matches the width and depth of the naiskos, and may be the site of a small built pediment, based on that lightly cut on other tombs (Fig. 253). ‘The acroteria with distinctive ‘schematiche volute’ on the door cymatium of Tomb W. 25, recorded by Maioletti, was thought by Professor Stucchi to have ‘caratteristiche arcaistiche ed egittizzant?’, based on similarities to the Pharaonic crown of Lower Egypt, but I doubt his interpretation. Another form of acroteria without volute is shown on Tomb W. 28, and resembles those cut mainly on lids of nearby rock-cut sarcophagi (Figs. 251, 304-305). There is a possibility that the latter style of acroteria had its roots in Persia, as almost identical examples are shown above the doors of built tower tombs at Pasargadae and Nagsh-i-Rustam in the Persepolis region, and also on ἃ rock-cut tomb at Tas Kule near Phocaea in Lydia.” Nothing is known of the inhumation burial practices relating to the wall sarcophagi which predominaintethis area, other than the dross of burial artifacts discarded by the robber of Tomb W. 24 in May 1998, pointing to a 4th cent. B. C. date for the burial, but not for the tomb.”

Type C. 3 (Figs. 215-216). In the Northern Necropolis on the eastern slope of Wadi Haleg Shaloof is a range of plain fagaded Tombs N. 385-396 cited by Cassels, who equated them in his field notebook with the morphology of Tomb W. 2, and recorded the inscription over the entrance of Tomb N. 385, seen previously by Norton (Fig. 34). Like some of those in Wadi bel Ghadir, these tombs are overshadowed by a deep overhang of rock, but differ by having neither crude Acolic capitals on pilasters, nor door surrounds (Fig. 214). Another group of tombs unregistered by Cassels runs between Tombs N. 405-406 (Fig. 215). Their entrances with a cymatium with acroteria are identical to Tomb W. 21 and their facades are slightly recessed, as Tomb W. 151 in Wadi Haleg Stawat (Fig, 214). Tomb 1 has two entrances and is a composite system, showing the remains of a low kline in the rear of the burial chamber; more significantly, adjoining this is what seems to be a primary theke, which by the size of its opening is the same as that cut in Rowe's Tomb N. 5 (Figs. 290, 298). Tomb 2, although altered later for burial, is again significant as it shows a pair of wall sarcophagi with a gangway at the side, recalling the primary loculus sys-

© Pacho (1827) PI. XLII; Cassels (1955), 18 Pl. VIIb; Goodchild (1971), 170 Abb. 138. “ Maioleti 1,571 Fig. 2. Stucchi (1975), 172-173 Figs. 157-158, 160-161; Boardman (2000), 55-60 Figs. 2. 32a-b, 37a-c, 38a-b. © The discarded robber material was found on the spoil from individual burrowings above sarcophagi, and is compared with burial artifacts in Rowe's Tomb N. 81-A, listed with their counterparts as follows: Black-glazed: small bolsal, JckanisM. 966. Corinthian: lid of pyxis. Unglazed wares: vide-necked amphoraM. 955, large and small flanged bowls Μ. 965, 961 + "Cassels (1955), 19 PL. Xd.

341

tem in composite Tomb W. 28 (Fig. 215). If neither tomb had wall sarcophagi, they would resemble the plan of Theangela Tomb T in Karia (Fig. 279). Tomb 3 facade has collapsed and the interior arrangement is as the morphology of Tomb W. 22 in Wadi bel Ghadir mentioned above (Fig, 214). Tomb 4 internal arrangement is like Tomb W. 31, but includes instead a small asymmetrical offering table H. 0. 47 L. 0. 60 W. 0. 53m in the corner, its base at the same level as the top of the cover slabs of the wall sarcophagi (Fig. 215). Tomb N. 407 has an identical interior, but its facade differs by having a pedimented entrance. In the same direction, a short distance away from Tomb N. 405, is the half-buried recessed Tomb of the Aniconic Niches, its facade niches cut at different times and similar to that cut on Beschi's Tomb (Figs. 215, 253). A similar terrace, unregistered by Cassels, exists above this range under another shallower overhang. Cut into a rocky outcrop on the hillside above Tomb N. 276 is another unregistered tomb whose interior resembles tombs in the N. 405 group, situated among a scatter of early rock-cut graves which are identical to those found by Rowe past Wadi Haleg Shaloof, the latter group tentatively dated by the pottery in partly robbed Grave N. 83-D to ca. 480 B. C. , in other words Late Archaic — Early Classical (Assem. XXVII-C; Figs. 166, 179-180, 333). The proximity of the ancient graves to the tomb on the outcrop may indicate a possible similarity in date. Type C. 4

(Figs. 217-218a).

The facade of Tomb

W. 21 is similar to Tomb

W.

25, both

lacking doorsurrounds although retaining the cymatium, and the plain squared pilaster capitalsincorporate the epistyle between them, instead of supporting the cornice. Of significance is the pediment on this tomb, which could be the explanation for the dressed epistyle sill noticed on Tomb W. 28, for example (Fig. 215). The interior arrangements differ by having an inner chamber with wall sarcophagi, recalling those used in the following type." The facade of Rowe's Tomb N. 81-A, terraced into the hillside, lacks pilasters in antis, and has a sunken forecourt characteristically bordered by a rock-cut sarcophagus at the side. The interior sarcophagus burials contained disturbed Ath cent. B. C. assemblages with Roman artifacts (Figs. 198, 378-381). In contrast, Tomb W. 32 has a pair of small square burial chambers, one with wall sarcophagi at the sides, which lead off an antechamber. This recalls the nearby Tomb W. 37 arrangement where a portico has been cut instead, although neither tomb shows evidence of a built superstructure (Figs. 210, 217). Type €. 5 (Figs. 217-218b). A small group of aedicula tombs high up on the eastern scarp at the head of Wadi Halag Stawat, a tributary of Wadi bel Ghadir, show the facade recessed in the natural rock face, leaving the projecting door surround and cymatium as the main features (Fig. 253). The Tomb of Abdul Rheem shows an epistyle sitting on top of the door surround, above which is a recessed tympanum containing a niche silhouette, cut in the form of an elongated aniconic bust, whereas on Tomb W. 22 above the entrance the niche is iconic, while on the western side of the wadi, Tomb W. 152 has a different niche cut inside a naiskos identical to that over Tomb S. 193, both for a normal aniconic bust." The tomb interiors are strikingly different by having engaged chamber sarcophagi in lateral banks, uncommon in Cyrene. In Beschi’s Tomb in El Mawy land, east of Tomb N. 196, the facade shows a dressed sill; the niche positioned beside the entrance indicates that there was no substantial superstructure other than a built cornice (Figs 220, 253). The latter tomb recalls those cut in the vicinity of Tomb N. 405 on the Tomb of the © Pacho (1827) Pl. XLIH; Maiolett 1,571 Tav. A. “ Cassels (1955), 18 Pl. VIIId; Beschi (1972), 212 Fig. 61,2. © Cassels (1955), 18-19 PL VIIL e; Beschi (1972), 210, 212 Fig. 61,1-2; Cyr. Mus. unpublished. Inv. No. 228 H. 0. 49m. Polos Dia. 0. 13 H. 0. 045m. Head H. 0. 33 Dia. 0. 12m. ShouldersH. 0. 105m. BaseW. 0. 38D. 0. 27m. Δ Pacho (1827) Pl. XXXV; Beschi (1972), 147-148 Fig. 8.

342 Aniconic Niches (Fig. 215). Some of these unusual Cyrenaican tombs resemble aedicula tombs in Karia and Phrygia (Figs. 279-280).

Type C. 6 (Figs. 217-218b). These tombs are the simplest, having a plain rock-cut facade and a pediment above. They noticeably project from the rock face, giving a three-dimensional appearance. An example of this is an untraced, partially buried tomb in Wadi bel Ghadir, which has a simple door surround and epistyle with an orthostat-built tympanum, the raking cornice probably fallen in antiquity.” The completely rock-cut Tomb of the Butcher in the Northern Necropolis has a square pedestal at the apex of the pediment, suitable for a bust or small half-figure to be placed on top. The interior was destroyed by Graziani's war shelter complex in 1940, but was probably originally a square chamber with wall sarcophagi each side of the entrance.” Cyrene Type D Tombs Type D. 1 (Fig. 217). The Tomb of Thanatos, discovered in a development area of New Shahat on the site of the Southern Necropolis, has a subterranean open peristyle with slender Doric columns supporting an architrave. Two sepulchres open off the burial chamber, and by the entrance to one of them is the inscription Θάνατος, thought to be Hellenistic." The tomb was adapted in the early Roman Period by the cutting of funeral bust niches above the main chamber entrance.” It shows similarities with Cypriot tombs by having identical slender columns, but has lost any proof of a former built Doric entablature (Fig. 282). IV.1.3 Cyrene Types E-F Tombs Fagade loculi (Fig. 219)

‘Type E. 1 (Fig. 219). The rock-cut facade for Tomb N. 224 shows four entrances between pilasters with an epistyle above, The built corona with mutules and guttae serves as a cornice, which is also used on the rake of the pediment, with a tympanum consisting of seven built orthostats with raking comice. Adjoining Tomb N. 225 shows a facade cut for a composite burial arrangement by including a wide chamber loculus system (Fig. 226). The latter system can also be used separately, as Ionic Tomb N. 192 clearly demonstrates (Fig. 228). The plain architrave supports a cornice with mutules and guttae. Both tombs are significant by having no metope-triglyph frieze, nor evidence for built screen or defined area above.” Type E. 2 (Fig. 219). Maioletti recorded in 1922 a tomb in Wadi bel Ghadir, since untraced, so knowledge of it comes from his published illustration. This shows a composite facade with two entrances separated by a Doric half-engaged column, with an architrave supporting a pediment as if imitating a porch. The sill above this may be the site of a built entablature with a screen, with a flight of steps leading up to a defined area behind (Figs. 220, 246). On the eastern slope of Wadi bu Turchia, Tomb N. 286 consists of a pair of facade loculus tombs with the same features and a sill above for possible pediments.* ‘Type E. 3 (Fig. 219). The more developed, entirely built Doric facades have an entablature. with a metope-ditriglyph frieze, and abandon the use of a pediment in favour of a screen above, © ? ?! ® » *

Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ph. F. 1285; Cassels (1955), 32. Goodchild (1971), 320. Gasperini (1998), 277-279 Figs. 2.3. Bacchielli (1996), 27-30 Figs. 1-2 Tav. IV. Porcher Watercolour 115. Maiolett IT, 323 Fig. 5.

343

mainly for the purpose of displaying statuary and concealing the defined area behind (Fig. 246). This is clearly shown in Tomb N. 178 where marble iconic half-figures were discovered (Figs. 39-41, 45). The wide rock-cut step in front of the present facade of Tomb N. 58 was required for siting a built isodomic structure, its architectural elements identical to those of the nearby Tomb N. 65, also on the eastern slope of Wadi Haleg Shaloof (Figs. 34, 108). The defined area behind the built screen of Tomb N. 179 can be clearly recognised with its revetment wall, and a low wall encloses the forecourt (Figs. 10, 219). There is also an annexe to the right-hand side of Tomb N. 178 which, in comparison with the example by Tomb N. 179, may have been converted to a square chamber loculus system, as if following the example of composite Tomb N. 228 nearby (Fig. 224). In none of the instances where these annexes occur, such as Tomb N. 149, are they surmounted by a defined area, indicating that they are later additions (Fig. 228). The facades of these tombs recall the rock-cut false facade loculus ‘Corinthian Tomb'at the Cova Necropolis, Rhodes (Fig. 283) Type E. 4 (Fig. 220). In comparison with the above tombs there is a noticeable difference in Tomb N. 196 bordering the ancient road, which has no pilasters between the much plainer entrances with consols attached to the door cymatium, but retains the lions’ heads on the cornice with a screen above and a modest defined area behind (Figs. 43, 45). According to Burton Brown burial artifacts were found in the annexe (Fig. 37), consisting of identical material to that found nearby in Rowe’s Tomb M. 3, indicating Ist century Roman reuse (Figs. 328, 330-331). The latter tomb differs by having fewer embellishments around the entrances and on the entablature, and may have a larger defined area behind surrounded by an isodomic wall, and an orthostat-built forecourt boundary wall in front (Figs. 116, 246). The facade of Rowe’s Tomb M. 16, which has a shield above the entrance, probably had a built Doric entablature and screen, suitable for either a stele or iconic half-figure, while the small loculus seems to form the standard size required to be cut for Doric tombs. The shield recalls an example on a loculus tomb with a recessed facade near Yenije in Karia and another on the ‘Tomb of the Shield’ in the Dokuz Sokak Necropolis, Rhodes (Figs. 279, 283)

Cyrene Type F Tombs

Type F. 1 (Fig. 220). The composite Tomb N. 21 has a Doric entablature and screen, incorporating Tonic decorative elements on the inserted marble door surrounds. These recall similar larger marble examples at Cyrene in the Second Artemision in the Apollo Sanctuary, the Temple of Apollo Archegetas on the Agora and a lintel in the Demeter Sanctuary? In Norton's excavation a tumbled marble stele, which originally stood on the marble statue plinth above the entablature, came from the forecourt (Figs. 34, 256). The original tomb interior consisted of a double-level loculus system which was subsequently altered (Figs. 36, 225). Examples of the same decorative door surround elements can be clearly seen on the Cyrenaic Treasury at Delphi, completed in 322-321 B. C. , giving some tangible dating (Fig. 285).* Type F. 2 (Figs. 220-221). The Ionic facade of Rowe's Tomb N. 198B is identical to Tomb

N. 183 on the opposite slope of El Mawy land, which has the only complete surviving example of an isodomic screen, but both their defined areas are buried under hillwash (Figs. 29, 115-116). The Ionic entablatures on these tombs are similar to that used on Rowe’s circular roofed tumulus Tomb M. 15 (Figs. 82, 96, 250), and also the size of the characteristic slender isodomic courses

? Stucchi (1975), 47-52 Figs. 34, 36, 38; White (1984), 96 Fig. 102; (1993), 60-63 Pls. 41-45 % Delphi III, 323 Fig. 3.

344

used underneath. There is a variation in this on Tomb N. 86, where a large orthostat is used to represent the same courses, but the remains of an orthostat revetment survive above (Fig. 27). This type of facade is also to be seen on smaller Tomb N. 108, above which is a plain orthostat screen H. 0. 98m with projecting returns in antis, minus its original built cornice. This has above Loc. 2 a rectangular socket for a block stele of a similar size to that cut for Rowe's Sarcophagus N. 81] (Figs. 257, 297). Another nearby, not so well preserved, cut into one of the surviving orthostats, is a recess H. 0. 90 W. 0. 53 D. 0. 10m which could be for a block stele. East of Tomb N. 86, on the same terrace, is an unregistered Tonic tomb whose forecourt is enclosed on three sides by a post and orthostat boundary, suggesting the purpose of Rowe's Tomb M. 3 forecourt channelling trench (Fig. 116). Type F. 3 (Fig. 221). A staircase by the facade of Tomb N. 39 leads into a defined area behind the isodomic entablature screen (Figs. 23, 246). The noticeable increase in height of the facade between the door cymatium and the Ionic entablature seems to give the opportunity to cut niches for receiving marble stelai or to cut representations of block-based stelai, as clearly seen above the entrances of Tombs W. 112-114 in Wadi Halag Stawat (Fig. 259). This recalls Tomb N. 17 in Wadi Haleg Shaloof where the same height occurs above the entrance, used for the purpose of a sculptured panel, emulating possibly Tomb N. 258 which has a statue recess (Figs. 225, 254). In Rowe’s Tomb N. 83, which has lost its entablature and screen, are entrances

belonging to a loculus system, indicated by the door surrounds and cymatium, which match those of Tomb N. 38 on the eastern slope of Wadi Haleg Shaloof (Fig. 3) and give a good impression of the original appearance and function of Rowe’s tomb (Figs. 170, 174, 291). Evidence for the adaption of these tombs is shown by the cutting of a square chamber loculus system in Tomb N. 39 which seems to emulate the composite Tomb N. 17 which it faces across the wadi (Fig. 225). ‘Type F. 4 (Fig. 221). Cassels correctly identified Tomb N. 36, on the upper terrace overlooking Wadi Haleg Shaloof, as being externally identical to Tomb W. 115 in Wadi Halag Stawat, which is cut between other ‘Type F. 3 tombs on a terrace and has the same widely-spaced loculus system. Evidence for a built screen for these is uncertain, and any defined area is at present buried in hillwash (Fig. 32). The sunken facade with false isodomic work is bordered by a cavetto of fluted tongues, recalling that adopted by built Tomb N. 180, which has also a rock-cut loculus system (Fig. 245). The latter also shows a Doric entablature above, recalling that on Tomb N. 21 on the other side of the wadi, which may indicate their date (Fig. 220).

Type F. 5 (Fig. 222). In the vicinity of Blundell Tomb D in El Mawy land is a pair of Type A block-cut sarcophagi placed behind the statue plinth as if forming a screen, in front of which halffigures could be displayed; stelai could also be placed on the sarcophagus lid plinths. A similar arrangement seems to be attempted on Rowe’s Tomb M. 3 which is nearby (Figs. 116, 304). In contrast, Tomb N. 209 reached by a passage ascending from the ancient road to Apollonia, seems to have at least two pairs of rock-cut klinai L. 1, 60 W. 0. 49 H. 0. 33m cut around the forecourt and its facade entrances recall those of Rowe's Tomb N. 10 (Figs. 6, 64, 292), but above is a row of orthostats, formerly topped by a projecting plain coping, serving as a revetment instead of a screen, which gives no space for statuary or stelai in front, although these could surmount the revetment. In Tombs N. 24-25 the austere tomb facades lack a door surround, and the orthostat revetment has collapsed. Evidence for later adaption is represented by a large sepulchre cut at the rear, at present obscured by painted Bedouin decoration, recalling Tomb N. 131 sepulchres in size (Figs. 8, 233)

Type F. 6 (Fig, 222). The dwarf entrances in the austere fagade of Rowe's Tomb N. 83-BF recall those in the interior of wide chamber loculus Said Faraj Tomb A (Fig. 227). Its entablature

345

is significant in having acroteria which are also used on a large isodomic-built burial precinct below El Mawy land (Fig. 246). The same acroteria are cut on loculus sarcophagi, but are more commonly cut on sarcophagus lids (Figs. 178, 304). An indication of dating is given by a figurine from Rowe's M. 3, which matches one found in Tomb N. 83-BF, suggesting a contemporary burial practice (Figs. 309, 345 nos, 89, 566)

Type F. 7 The sunken forecourt of loculus Tomb S. 227 has steps leading down into it but the tomb has no built facade, only the large isodomic blocks which enclose the defined area above the burial system, some of which now lie in the forecourt. Funeral bust niches are cut into the tomb’s rock-cut face, a further indication that no facade ever existed (Fig. 246). IV.1.4 Cyrene Types G-J Tombs Square chamber loculi (Figs. 223-225)

Type G. 1 (Fig. 223). A small number of tombs with plain porticoes without pillars, other than those in antis, but with a simple pediment above an epistyle, belong to a type first planned by Porcher in the locality of Tomb N. 293, and shown as a view in Watercolour 101, in which can be seen a series of drilled holes Dia. 0. 02 D. 0, 05m along the epistyle at 0. 21m intervals (Fig. 27). A characteristic of these tombs is a pair of single lateral loculi contained within the portico, and the interiors consist of small square chambers with pairs of loculi on three sides. In the vicinity of Tomb N. 274 is a similar tomb, but without a pedimented portico, with the interior showing the arrangement as above. This matches the larger interior arrangement shown in Tomb N. 365, which has instead loculi with dwarf entrances, identical to those in Said Faraj Tomb A, and the facade loculus Rowe's Tomb N. 83-BF (Figs. 178, 222, 227). The external appearance of Tomb N. 365 is similar to that shown in Porcher Watercolour 101. However, its raking cornice mouldmatches that used on Tomb N. 52, indicating that the latter does not belong to the archaic period. Tomb N. 274 recorded by Cassels was intended to double the capacity to two pairs of loculi on three sides, but extensive damage by the Romans altered the exterior by the removal of the pediment, leaving the anta supporting its truncated ends and the cutting of a wide niche above the original entrance, as if intended for the insertion of a sculpted marble panel with funerary busts in relief, emulating those built on tombs along the Via Appia in Rome. The deliberate lack of portico columns on these tombs in Cyrene recalls the same characteristic in the larger free-standing aedicula Amaseia Tomb D in Cappadocia (Fig. 281). Cyrene Type H Tombs Type H. 1 (Fig. 223). The small Tomb N. 142 shows a simply cut outline of a pediment above the entrance, either a portico or the representation of a porch (Figs. 215, 223). The interior shows developed square chamber loculi with full height entrances, later adapted by converting those at the rear into a pair of sepulchres, marking a change in tomb morphology (Fig. 233). Type H. 2 (Fig. 223). In some tombs the entablature and statue plinth were abandoned in

favour of quarrying rock-cut sarcophagi to form an integral upper part of the facade, recalling Tomb N. 17, and the much plainer Tomb N. 53 where they were also used to form the returns of the forecourt, the latter recalling Tomb N. 22 in appearance (Figs. 225, 235). In these tombs the defined area at the rear seems to be abandoned, with the sarcophagi being cut in terraces, rather than enclosures as seen in Rowe’s excavations (Figs.

” Cherstich (2002), 185-186 Tavv. 94-96.

34-35, 165).

An alternative was to cut large

346

sarcophagi in front of the tomb facade, as seen by an example in the vicinity of Tomb N. 131, where they appear on either side of the plain entrance leading into a chamber loculus system. A course of orthostats represents a built revetment which has lost its cornice. Type H. 3 (Fig. 223). Evidence for tombs being adapted is clearly demonstrated by the Doric facade loculus Tomb N. 65, but in the Copland Tomb the existing Loc. 6 had been truncated and cut to one side to form a low square chamber in which Loc. 7 could be cut subsequently. Cyrene Type I Tombs

Type I. 1 (Fig. 224). Only the lower part of the built facade of Tomb N. 173 survives, including its three rock-cut steps with their returns and the door jambs, with a plinth on either side of the single entrance. On the right-hand plinth was found a marble statue base to ZATYPOZ IIPOTAPXOY. A mid 3rd century B. C. half-figure Beschi Type I was also found associated with this tomb. The probable built Doric entablature and screen above have collapsed and the debris from them has not been traced. The interior was probably designed to have triple loculi entrances on three sides of the chamber, but these were only cut in the far comers, and the tomb was eventually adapted as a painted camera (Fig. 235), the intended interior recalling that of the adapted Tomb N. 21 (Fig. 225). The steps and their returns recall the built examples of TombS. 388 (Fig. 232). The exterior recalls Rowe's Tomb N. 401 which until recently also had an ostentatious built facade (Fig. 91), but the latter’s apparently unfinished interior was probably intended as a chamber loculus system (Figs. 101, 103). Type I. 2 (Fig. 224). A better preserved example is Tomb N. 357, where a passage leads into the forecourt, recalling Tomb N. 258 in its arrangement (Fig. 225).” It has a rock-cut pseudoisodomic facade with a Doric built entablature with metope-diglyph frieze, cymatium with lions’ heads with a statue plinth, on top of which, centrally placed in line with the entrance, is an inscribed marble statue base for an iconic half-figure. The entrance is identical to Tomb N. 181 where the tomb morphology differs (Fig. 226). Internally Tomb N. 357 differs by having double loculi entrances intended round three sides of the chamber. A subsequent rear adaption shows the method of cutting chambers, with a quarryman’s vertical channellings being evident, implying that hewn-out stone, rather than being employed for isodomic work, was discarded. Such actions were scen in Rowe's Enclosure N. 83-BK, where such debris was found (Fig. 181). Identical Tomb N. 226 on the same terrace as composite Tombs N. 228-229 originally had three pairs of loculi, the rear pair being demolished, leaving the entrances truncated at the top and the space adapted to form a cubiculum with arcosolia (Figs. 224, 237),

Type I. 3 (Fig. 224). Porcher's Watercolour 92 has two forms of burial system combined as ἃ composite tomb. This may represent Tomb N. 228 the facade of which shows winged caryatids supporting the entablature with Ionic capitals in antis, and in the forecourt the remains of a large pedestal stele (Fig. 259). The adjoining Tomb N. 229 has the same burial system, but a much simpler facade with a forward-projecting feature above the entrances representing a corona with an uncut Doric entablature, and when eventually cut the facade would be identical to that of Tomb N. 196 (Figs. 43, 220). This feature is also cut on the plain external facade of Tomb W. 20 in ? Doc. Ant. ILI, 118 n. 122 Tav. XXXIV Fig. 782; Horn (1943), 197 Fig. 30; Cyr. Mus. Ph. B. 1253; Beschi (1972), 199, 245-244 n. 37 Fig. 77. » Cassels (1955), 30; Muzeiny (2003), 165-172 Figs. 1-4. © Cassels (1955), 19 PL. Xa,

347

Wadi bel Ghadir which has a Doric interior (Figs. 5, 226). In Said Faraj Tomb B the square chamber has been cut with loculi at various times, recalling the adapted Tomb N. 39 (Fig. 225), in both instances by a facade loculus system, as if following the accepted system of Tomb N. 228 mentioned above. Porcher Watercolour 96 shows an untraced tomb which may have begun simply as three loculi which have been adapted by enlarging the outer two into square chamber loculus systems and adding a subsequent sepulchre, recalling Tomb N. 142 mentioned below

(Fig. 233).

Cyrene Type J Tombs Type J. 1 (Fig. 225). At the foot of the hillslope below Rowe's excavations is Tomb N. 258 with an unusual facade where, above the entrance, there is a rock-cut statue recess, originally the site of an inscribed stele, found tumbled below (Fig. 256). Above is an Ionic cornice, the sill of which is entirely plain with the exception of a low orthostat revetment with coping, suggesting the existence of a defined area. Because of the height of the recess the tomb facade had to be cut deeper into the hillside compared with the surrounding facade loculus tombs, in the process lengthening the forecourt with a later inserted triclinium recess to one side (Fig, 235). At Sambar, between Apollonia and Cyrene, several facade loculi tombs show a recessed panel over the Ionic door cymatium, which is embellished with pilasters in antis and a Doric entablature above, as if representing a naiskos or statue recess. Type J. 2 (Fig. 225) Composite Tomb N. 17 has a stilted entablature similar to that on Tomb N. 39, but differs by having a sculptured panel above Loc. 2 entrance (Figs. 221, 254). The unrecorded Tomb N. 83 bis in Rowe's necropolis excavations, of which only the interior survives, has wide single-level loculi which immediately recall those in Rowe's Tomb N. 10 (Fig, 227), their size and shape appropriate for accommodating a coffin, such as that found at Aslaia (Fig. 266). If this is the case, then those cut in the square chamber loculus Tomb N. 17 may have served the same purpose prior to a later sepulchre being cut (Fig. 233). Tyre J. 3 (Fig. 225) There is no doubt that facade loculus Tomb N. 21 was radically adapted in its tomb morphology, as the entrance and loculus space serve as a corridor to lead into a square chamber loculus system, which by its size was capable of accommodating a possible nine loculi, as in Tomb N. 173 (Fig. 224). Adapted Tomb N. 39 shows an arrangement similar to Porcher Watercolour 92 with a square chamber loculus system to one side, and would account for the plain niche cut for a block stele above the entrance, as if emulating the position of the stele on the rock-cut sculpted panel above Tomb N. 17 Loc. 2 entrance (Figs. 224-225) IV.1.5 Cyrene Types K-M Tombs Wide chamber loculi (Figs. 225-228)

Type K. 1 (Fig. 225) The unique Tomb W. 80, high up in Wadi Halag Stawat, is far from the ancient road and only accessible via a long flight of steps which runs across the rockface, leading up to a sill less than 0, 50m wide in front of the rock-cut facade, pentastyle in antis with two plain entrances, only one of which was used.” The badly weathered half-engaged columns with slender pillar shafts and the quarter-round antae support a partly surviving entablature, the architrave © Pacho (1827), 374-375 Pls. XLIIT-XLIV. © Muzeiny (2003), 165-172 Figs. 1-4; Pacho (1827), 374 Pl. XXIX; Stucchi (1975), 71-72 Figs. 57-58; Frigerio (1997), 70-72 Figs. 19-20 Tav. XXVIII. © Goodchild (1971), 170 Abb. 141.

348

mutules having no guttae, and the metope-triglyph frieze partially built at one end. The natural rock is cut back as if to accommodate a superstructure which suggests a free standing orthostat built pediment with horizontal and raking cornices with acroteria. The intercolumniation is irregular, being smaller on either side of the central column. Because of this irregularity some of the triglyphs do not appear in the conventional positions above the columns. No defined area could be seen, and no coursing for a screen could be discerned. The interior is a wide chamber doublelevel loculus system with three dwarf entrances, above each of which are the remains of a crudely cut cymatium. It is likely that the unused facade entrance was intended to be for an identical system, and the existing chamber was enlarged by the addition of two later Hellenistic loculi, one at each end. Cyrene Type L Tombs Type L. 1 (Fig. 226) The external projection across the facade above the entrance of Tomb W. 20 bordering the ancient road (Fig. 4) recalls that on the unfinished composite Tomb N. 229, representing an uncut Doric entablature,“ but a screen and defined area could not be included because of the presence of the earlier cut Tomb W. 18 above (Fig. 212). The interior has a wide chamber cut in front of the loculi entrances in Tomb W. 20 imitating a fagade loculus system, such as Tomb N. 178, for example, which in this case has a forecourt (Fig. 219). Nearby Tomb W. 16 above the road has been quarried with an identical chamber facade between archaic chamber Tombs W. 15 and W. 17, behind what appears to be an earlier tomb (Figs. 208, 210) whose small chamber is now in ruins inside a large, roughly squared opening cut in the rock, which is not an integral part of the Hellenistic tomb. The Tomb of Altalena has a similar internal facade, and from its known descriptions also seems to be cut in an adapted tomb complex. Its rediscovery shows a Doric tomb with a metope-triglyph entablature with a pediment above, but the entrance has disappeared (Figs. 5, 18). This type of tomb recalls Maioletti’s rock-cut facade loculus tomb which shows a defined area behind (Fig, 219). Archaeological dating evidence for these tombs, such as Tomb W. 20, has to rely on still damp burial artifact fragments discarded by tomb robbers probably minutes before my arrival, which give a mid 4th cent. B. C. date connected with this tomb type.” Type L. 2 (Fig. 226). The Doric facade of Tomb N. 181 is identical to that of Tomb N. 357,

but its interior diflers by showing instead a wide chamber loculus system (Fig. 224). In contrast, Rowe's Tomb N. 401 had originally a built facade with a similar false half-entrance to those above (Figs. 91, 101), pointing to the possibility of an alternative burial system to that previously suggested (Fig. 224). However, it seems that the quarrying process was halted in this tomb, and the intended layout will always be in question. The tomb found in 1995 in Wadi el Aish and excavated by the Antiquities Department may have had a Doric facade, but alternatively may have been a Type M Ionic example (Fig. 228). Its importance lies in the fact that it was thought to have undisturbed burial assemblages, and in the central loculus a complete Panathenaic amphora stood in one comer on the separator slabs above the burial (info. Dr Fadel Ali Mohamed). The best example of a wide chamber loculus system seems to be that shown in Porcher's plan, ^* Maicletti I, 580 Fig. 4; Cassels (1955), 19 PL XI. © Maioleui Il, 716 Fig. 5; Bacchiell (1993), 163; Bonacasa (2000), 160-161; Discarded robber material in May 1998 Loc. 1- small hollow-moulded terracotta figurine body fragment wearing chiton; fragments two black glazed olpai, one tall and the other squat; Loc. 3 - fragment of unglazed ware collared bow] which when saved at 3pm was stil damp, in icating very recent activity.

349

Watercolour 91, but nothing is known of the exterior facade, and an interior view by Porcher shows that it had been altered to become host to a cubiculum system (Fig. 238). Type L. 3 (Fig. 227). Rowe's Tomb N. 10 facade is rock-cut, with a built Doric entablature and screen above and a defined area behind (Figs. 61, 64) recalling the facades of the nearby Tomb N. 11 (Fig. 66) and of square chamber loculus Tomb N. 357 (Fig. 224). Is significance lies in the interior, where the uncommon height of the loculi is suitable for an average standing person, and only occurs elsewhere in square chamber loculus system Tombs N. 17 and N. 83 bis where they are also cut wider (Figs. 174, 179, 225), as if to contain a large Aslaia type wooden coffin (Fig. 266), which for the normal-sized, narrower loculi of Tomb N. 10 would be impossible (Fig. 298). The size of the local limestone block sarcophagus in Rowe's Tomb M. 5 (Figs. 144, 304) gives a tangible indication that, if it were inserted in Tomb N. 10, there would be a gap of about 0. 10m at either end when the vessels were in place in their niches (Fig. 261) Type L. 4 (Fig. 227). Only a few large isodomic blocks represent the facade of Said Faraj Tomb A. The interior is very plain with a noticeable lack of height for the loculi entrances, recalling those cut in the facade loculus system of Rowe's Tomb N. 83-BF (Figs. 178, 222). Cut in the step are two undatable cremation receptacles which had circular covers recalling Rowe's Enclosure N. 82-23 square example (Figs. 193, 305). The significance of Said Faraj Tomb A is its later adaption to include a galleried chamber loculus system (Fig. 229). Cyrene Type M Tombs

Type M. 1 (Fig. 228). Because it was not cut above the ancient road to Apollonia but terraced into the hillslope below it, rock-cut Tomb N. 192 could not face the thoroughfare (Fig. 42). The facade has a built Tonic entablature, but the screen above has disappeared and the defined area boundary wall overlooked the road (Figs. 37, 46). The interior has an identical burial system to composite Ionic Tomb N. 225 and Doric Tomb N. 181, while the latter, with Tomb N. 192, became hosts to later cubiculum systems (Figs. 219, 238).

Type M. 2 (Fig. 228). The austere rock-cut Tomb N. 83-BF bis has only a built orthostat revetment and defined area above, the interior showing an uncompleted series of loculi (Figs. 175, 178). The revetment with coping on this tomb recalls that built on facade loculus Tomb N. 209 which has lost its coping (Fig. 222). IV.1.6 Cyrene Types N-O Tombs Long chamber loculi (Figs. 228-230) Type N. 1 (Fig. 228). A significant interior change was by turning the wide chamber loculus system at right-angles to the main entrance, in the process doubling a tomb's capacity, as shown by Said Faraj Tomb A (Fig. 229). Porcher Watercolour 94 shows an unregistered tomb terraced © Bacchielli 1995b), 151 Pls. LXIVa-c. The following artifacts, identified from the published plates, consist of: Locuus 1 (PL LXIVa) contained 1 bronze stigil (Cat. 6), black-glazed: 3 bolsals (Cat. 64), 2 ribbed pelikai (Cat. 70), 1 lamp (Cat. 102); local wares: 1 spheriform olpe (Cat. 200), 1 large dish, 1 large and 2 small collared bowls (Cats. 211-212), 1 ‘unguentatium (Cat. 220). Loculus 2 (Pl. LXIVb) contained 1 bronze strigil (Cat. 6), black-glazed: 1 Panathenaic amphora with lid (Cat. 43), 2 small bolsals (Cat. 64), 1 shoulder oinochoe (Cat. 74); local wares: 2 water amphorae (Cat. 177), 22collared bowls, !?unguentarium, 1?fragment. Loculus 3 (Pl. LXIVc) contained 1 bronze strigil (Cat. 6), 1 bronze disk mirror (Cat. 9), black-glazed: 2 model skyphoid cups (Cat. 47), 1 cup kantharos (Cat. 66),?2 pelikai (Cat. 70), 2 hydriai (Cat. 81), 2 small bolsals, 1 small olpe, 1 pyxis; local wares: 1 water amphora (Cat. 175), 9 collared bowls (information Abdulkader el Muzeiny). Luni (2003), 109 Figs. 17-18, © Said Faraj, Reynolds (1979), 231-236 Figs. 1, 3-4

350

into the hillside in El Mawy land, whose built facade has now fallen, surmounted by an isodomicbuilt temple tomb with Ionic facade within a small defined area; the lower tomb includes what appears to be a composite of two systems of a wide chamber in front with a long chamber loculus system at the rear (Figs. 228, 243, 246). Luca Cherstich has found another example of this system, Tomb S. 64 which has a built Tonic facade and door, indicating that the tomb shown by Porcher may originally have had, or was intended to have, a similar exterior. Here, the pair of loculi at the rear has been later altered to form sepulchres.®

‘Type N. 2 (Fig, 228). Luca Cherstich has recorded Tomb 8, 74 which is shown here in its primary state, and is without an antechamber. The Copland Tomb, its external facade unknown, also has no antechamber and has later quarried internal loculi with a greater length, a feature more commonly used in galleried chamber loculus tombs (Figs. 61, 230). The long chamber loculus system recalls the interior of porticoed Tomb N. 171 and unporticoed chamber loculus Tomb N. 91 where the central system may, however, indicate an alternative development (Figs. 231.232). These recall two identical examples, Chambrette C in the Hadra cemetery, Alexandria, and a subterranean dromos tomb with single-level loculi at Nea Paphos in Cyprus (Figs. 275,

282).

Type N. 3 (Fig. 228). Cut in the plain facade of Tomb N. 149 are three small, shallow, round headed niches above and either side of the door cymatium as if for a triad. The built entablature and its orthostat revetment above is completely destroyed (Figs. 234, 254). The interior has quadruple pairs of loculi cut in the long chamber, which at the rear has been subsequently adapted with columbarium sepulchres (Fig. 234). A noticeable coincidence is the presence of a small square annexe cut on the right-hand side of the main tomb, recalling that in Tomb N. 178. These annexes imply that coexistence of alternative burial practices was a requirement and may represent an ossuary (Fig. 219). The exterior of Tomb N. 131 is of a type to have had an isodomic facade with a built Tonic entablature and screen. None of this exists today, and the two thin isodomic courses belong to later alterations; the cymatium of the interior entrances to the long chamber loculi are the same as used on Doric facade loculus Tomb N. 65 in Wadi Haleg Shaloof (Fig. 219). The rear of this tomb has been radically altered to accommodate what appears to be a triclinium with sepulchres (Fig. 233). Cyrene Type Ὁ Tombs Type O. 1 (Fig. 229). The facade of Tomb N. 150 has a total of eight rock-cut false doors cut either side of the central true entrance, above which is a Ionic entablature with a continuous statue plinth, and behind this a single course of large plain orthostats forming a revetment. The interior shows a well-cut gallery with a pair of long loculi cut at the end, adjacent to which is a single shorter lateral pair, leaving space for an intended further five pairs. This is remarkably similar to an example at Tocra recorded by Beechey which recalls the arrangements of Oliverio's Tomb at Tolmeita and Crowe's subterranean tomb at Benghazi, whose facades are unknown (Figs. 267-269).

Type O. 2 (Fig. 229). Similar in its morphology, Tomb N. 165 differs externally by having a large forecourt with an entirely plain rock-cut facade capped by a built cornice, deeply terraced into the hillside. Because of the resulting height of the facade, a screen may have been omitted. The interior was adapted to include a later cubiculum system (Figs. 30, 237). The later adaption to Said Faraj Tomb A, quarried with a galleried loculus system at right angles to an earlier wide Cherstich (2002), 159-157 Tav. 78-84.

351

chamber loculus system, increased its capacity with lateral pairs of loculi being cut, demonstrating its chronological development (Fig. 227).

Type O. 3 (Fig. 230). Tomb S. 1 has a sunken forecourt which borders the ancient road to Balagrae with, as Tomlinson noted: ‘a row of 7 sarcophagi cut in the top of the front (rock cut) wall. The forecourt contains debris from the built false facade, comprising fluted Tonic column drums and parts of the Doric entablature. The tomb entrance is approached from ἃ small courtyard on the right hand side behind and below the built colonnaded porticoed facade. Buried steps lead down to a large galleried loculus system parallel to the facade, where six pairs of loculi with plain entrances have been cut, another four pairs remaining uncut. Over the entrance to Loc. 3 appears a later Christian inscription preceded by a cross. At the far end, Luca Cherstich identified a dislodged ‘Slab Y cover and marble cinerary urn fragment indicating that it became host to Roman cremations (Figs. 261-262). The old Muslim cemetery occupies the whole of the sunken forecourt of Tomb S. 4 where, in the fallen facade debris a large inscribed pillar stele to the KAEAPXOZ family was recorded by Porcher in 1861 as a watercolour (Fig. 256). According to Cassels fieldnote description the tomb exterior is: ‘Like N171: but (portico of] massive pilasters w. Uonic] bases. also... Entab: pieces of normal arch + trig. frieze + cornice (c. reversa under soffit). also frags of small semi attached columns: also lots of dentils inc one piece... perhaps from over the pilasters at front. Base inscr. MET QU I EXETIMO (sic) and big statue, but not deep. Possibly there was a balustrade, to which the small semi attached columns belonged... Another base inscribed AKEXQP / NIKOAAMQ: back of the base left rough’ which Tomlinson identified as belonging to his Class G false facades (Fig. 231) Luca Cherstich has recently studied the architectural debris and established that it had a porticoed facade with a screen, but does not appear to have any tomb entrances in the front. The small courtyard on the left side of the facade indicates that the tomb's entrance is here, at present buried in debris.” The interior is therefore currently unknown, but on the basis of Tomb S. 1 it would seem to be approached as before, with steps leading down to a galleried loculus system. The epigraphic evidence of the additional statue bases discounts the supposition that these are privately built tombs.” Type O. 4 (Fig. 230). Tomb S. 9 according to Tomlinson's notes had a: ‘Large forecourt, silted. Large door at rear. Chamber with 10 loculi each side, two at rear. Niche either side of door.” Recent robbing in front of the entrance had revealed an inscribed marble statue base among large isodomic blocks which have fallen from the false facade into the extensive forecourt which borders the road. The interior is a galleried loculus system, this time at right-angles to the facade, with a fault in the roof of the chamber, which had necessitated the installation of lintel stones to rectify it.” Nothing is now known of the exterior of the ‘Tomb of Aristoteles’, but the interior is shown in Porcher Watercolours 93, 97, described as a ‘detached tomb south-east of the city’. If this co-ordinate was taken from Smith and Porcher's ‘Tomb of Residence’ it would suggest a location in the vicinity of the above tombs (Fig. 19). This resembles a shorter version of Tomb 8. 1, representing a galleried chamber loculus tomb with an inscription above one of the entrances, one loculus adapted to form a small sepulchre, with others included at the rear of the gallery ® ® δι ®

Reynolds (2003), 177; Cherstich (2002), 143-153 Tawv. 59-70. Cherstich (2002), 118-143 Tavw. 18, 38.58. Cassels Arch. Yellow Book fol. 1; Tomlinson (1967), 254, 250-251 Pl.46c. Cassels Arch. Blue Book fol. 35; Tomlinson’s personal papers: 1956 notebookfol. 80; (1967), 251, 254 PI. 47c.

352

(Figs. 30, 233).? Tombs such as these seem to indicate a communal burial system as each loculus is double-level and capable of holding four bodies, which in Tomb S. 1 would mean eighty-four inhumation burials. IV.1.7 Cyrene Types P-R Tombs Porticoed and sepulchre (Figs. 231-234)

‘Type P. 1 (Fig. 231). In the collapse of the portico into the buried forecourt of Tomb ‘dei Mnasarch? N. 171 were several statue bases in the debris without their female iconic half-figures, suggesting the existence of an isodomic-built screen and recalling those discovered in similar circumstances in the unporticoed chamber loculus Tomb S. 388 which has a similar tomb morphology (Fig. 232). A large pillar stele was also found in the collapsed debris, close to which was a Beschi Type I half-figure (Fig. 256). In his notebook Tomlinson described: ‘Across the back of the {forecourt run two steps... On the top step were six columns between engaged half columns... Capital (badly weathered) Echinus & abacus 0. 22, of two equal parts of. 11 each. Echinus straight sided, runs into abacus without a groove’. The two figured metopes found in the debris may have formed an integral part of the antae of the screen, and if placed above the statue plinth would have given continuity with the statuary." Tomlinson described ‘Polychromy. Cyma reversa soffit moulding bas leaf with red spaces between. Mutules blue, viae red, guttae plain with red rings round edge of underside. Red band across geison front above mutules. Continuous band over top of frieze blue. Top (vertical) edge of cyma recta over the metopes red. Triglyphs entirely blue. Blue is sky blue, redis pillar box red.’ He also noted the use of U-shaped lifting grooves in the ends of the architrave blocks. The interior of square and rectangular chamber loculus systems is now inaccessible, but Cassels in his fieldnotes made a sketch of the arrangement, which is similar to that of Tombs N. 90-92 which have no portico (Fig. 232). Type P. 2 (Fig. 231).

Cassels’ fieldnote on Tomb S. 201:

‘an important tomb. Above N. side is

[sketch showing a portico] structure, the back wall of which bas a door-like structure in the middle though it can never have been an entrance. Pieces of entablature & columns lie below." Tomlinson's notebook identified this as his Class G variant, a false-facaded tomb with Ionic built portico and Doric frieze, The tomb has a rectangular 'sunk forecourt’, with a rock-cut facade at its north-west end. ‘If there was a built facade at this level itis concealed under the fallen debris of the upper false facade, " The central, weathered entrance led from the forecourt to a small, square, rock-cut burial “chamber with one loculus in each side and in the rear, that at the rear being shorter than the others’ The upper facade ‘consists of three steps, with projecting returns at the end, also with three steps. At the back of this stood a wall, in front of which runs a colonnade of free standing columns between engaged half columns. " "There is nothing behind the facade, which survives to a height of seven courses... above the stylobate level. In the centre a false door decoration is carved on a slab’ which ‘stands between jambs with a ‘hawksbeak'leaf decoration in the outer moulding.” The Doric entablature may have had a screen, but no statuary or bases were found, although

® Pacho (1827), 382 Pl. LXV. 9; CIG 5164; Letronne (1848), 374-375 ins. VI; Smith and Porcher (1864), 116-117 PI. 86 nos. 27,29; Fadel, Reynolds (1997), 34-35 Fig. 1 "Tomb of Aristote % Beschi (1972), 168-186 Figs. 24-39; Paribeni (1959) Cat. 45, 31-32 Tav. 47; Tomlinson’s personal papers: 1956 notebook fols. 19-22; (1967), 254-255. 7. Cassels Arch. Yellow Book fol. 19; Tomlinson’s personal papers: 1956 notebook fols. 97-99; (1967), 241-249 Figs. 12 Pls. Macc, 450, c.

353

they are likely to have existed on this type of tomb, based on the recent findings by Claudio Frigerio on Tomb S. 388 and Luca Cherstich on Tomb S. 4 mentioned above.“ The burial chamber seems unusually small, and may indicate that it was intended to be extended at a later date, a course which was never implemented, resulting in a final small loculus being cut instead. Cyrene Type Q Tombs

Type Q. 1 (Fig. 232). On the terrain in Wadi Sneidi is Tomb E. 180, claimed in Cassels’notebook to have ‘back walPin ‘drafted masonry’ and by Tomlinson to have ‘main wall blocks tool faced with draughted margins’ and classed by him as his Class G variant, described in his notebook as ‘rock cut with added walling — at least 14 courses... across back, and with projecting returns. Added facade’ now fallen ‘in front of ibis, with, possibly, free standing columns, entablature and a slab roof. He saw the ‘remains of an Ionic entablature’, identified by a course of dentils, but in his publication he concluded that there was no evidence for a colonnade, a structure recalling similarities with Tomb S. 388 being indicated instead (Fig. 232). The tomb had ‘3 doors, with decorated false door slabs. Only the central opening is now actually visible, the side doors being possibly completely false.’ According to Cassels, the ‘middle entrance leads to 4 x 2 x 4’, the rock-cut interior being a long chamber loculus system behind the facade (Fig. 228). Any traces of a defined area are concealed by hillwash, as is the forecourt.” Tomb E. 215 was also identified as Class G variant by Tomlinson, and according to his notebook has a rock-cut forecourt, its walls showing false isodomic work, which was entered by a ramp at the right-hand front comer. Cassels stated in his notebook: ‘piles of masonry have fallen into the court but much of the built facade rear wall still standing’. Tomlinson described: doors cut in rock, with built surrounds, not completely false doors’... Upper part of central door solid, with false door decoration’ and ‘a high false facade’ with Doric frieze “The geison block comes from the outer front corner of an anta as projecting wall but there is ‘no surviving traces oftbe colurans’. The rear of the false facade was ‘plain except for a row of dentils at the top’ and Tomlinson also noticed U-shaped lifting grooves at the ends of the blocks. His description of the interior is confined to: ‘Only central door leads anywhere for certain, as the others are buried under the rubble’. Cassels’ notes are more informative: ‘Inside 5 x 1 x 5 but excellently preserved (1) doorways, The 1 is a wide entrance to another small space off which two more perbaps (2) slits open. Above it a most interesting entab. with architrave of two fasciae & dentils. The latter architectural details are confirmed by Tomlinson, who noted ‘an Ionic entablature (small) but omitted to mention that it was inside the tomb, above a pair of pilasters, and marks the division between the long chamber and the separate small rectangular burial chamber with two loculi. Claudio Frigerio's reconstruction shows the tomb to be similar to the ‘Tomb of the Shield” at Dokuz Sokak, Rhodes (Fig. 283)" Type Q. 2 (Fig. 232). The full extent of the rock-cut sunken forecourt is demonstrated by that of Tomb S. 388, which is bordered by two small flights of steps for access leading down into it. At one end it contained the architectural debris of the fallen facade, which included two small marble pillar stelai with their capping stones, two iconic half-figures and a clutch of five decorated statue bases dated to 3rd cent. B. C., recalling in appearance Tomb N. 171 where the same range πὸ Frigerio (1997), 69-70 Fig. 18 Tav. XXVII; Cherstich (2002), 90 Tav. 142, 7. Cassels Arch. Blue Book fol. 41; Tomlinson’s personal papers: 1956 notebook fols. 116-117; (1967), 252, 254 PI. 47d. ™ Cassels Arch. Blue Book fol. 45; Tomlinson’s personal papers: 1956 notebook fols. 144-145; (1967), 252, 254; Frigerio (1997), 68-69 Fig. 17 Ta. XXIILXXVI.

354

of debris was found (Figs. 231, 256).” The facade starts with triple steps with returns, similar to those used on Tombs N. 173 and S. 201 (Figs. 224, 231). The three entrances lead directly into composite long chamber loculus systems. The central chamber with two loculi at the far end is flanked by two systems resembling wide chamber loculus systems turned at right-angles, resulting in long chambers each with five loculi on the inner side. Claudio Frigerio's reconstruction of Tomb S. 388 shows an unporticoed Doric built facade with screen above. On the Balagrae road Luca Cherstich cites another example Tomb S. 66 which had originally an identical burial system τὸ S. 388, but shows what seems to be a later extension of loculi to the left of the long chamber. This is reflected on the ground surface above, where an additional wall has been constructed beside the left wall of the defined area, extending its boundary (Fig. 246) Ὁ Type Q. 3 (Fig. 232). Tombs N. 90-92 in a rock-cut forecourt are terraced into the lower level of the hillside without any trace of a built portico and its Doric entablature (Fig. 28). Above and behind the rock-cut facade is built monument Tomb N. 87, symmetrically placed over Tomb N. 90, which could be situated within a defined area, although no trace of built walls has been found (Fig. 245). This group of tombs shows a morphology very similar to that used in porticoed ‘Tomb N. 171 mentioned above (Fig. 231). Such a close similarity suggests that this was originally one tomb, although Tomlinson in his notebook states for Tomb N. 91: ‘Large forecourt, includes other tombs to R & L. Central tomb with one central door. Side walls built, originally bonded in (alternate courses) to the rock face. Opus isod. incisions.” Type Q. 4 (Fig. 232). Unporticoed Tomb N. 55 borders the ancient road, lacking space for a forecourt, and shows widely-spaced entrances and a pedestal stele (Fig. 259). It has a rock-cut facade with Doric entablature and plain frieze; above this there was originally a built cornice and isodomic screen which fronted a defined area.” The unfinished interior resembles the adapted system nearby in Tomb N. 59 with a later cut substitute chamber loculus system, giving the sequence of development of tomb morphology (Figs. 104, 108). The lack of sills for separator slabs in Tomb N. 55 loculi points either to an inefficient use of space, perhaps to give the impression of a more grandiose tomb, or to the loculi serving the purpose of corridors for quarrymen to cut alternative chamber loculi systems. Cyrene Type R Tombs ‘Type R. 1 (Fig, 233). The later adaption of long chamber loculus Tomb N. 131 shows several principal chambers, the main one at the far end with two low benches on the flanking sides with originally four pilasters rising from them. This resembles a similar rock-cut arrangement in the ‘Cave of the Priests’ in the Apollo Sanctuary which shows also a later built tank including two colonnetres, whose surviving lotus-and-acanthus capital recalls those used on the Severan build. ings (dated A. D. 193-216) at Leptis Magna. This gives a terminus post quem for the original cutting of the cave, which on this basis could be contemporary with Tomb N. 131, and both arrangements recall the Ist century A. D. triclinium in Köm-el-Shukafa, Alexandria (Fig. 276). The full height sepulchres with off-centre entrances leading from the triclinium in Tomb N. 131 recall 7? SEG IX, 226.232; Doc. Ant. 1.2, 116-117n. 115-120 Figs. 71-76 Tav. XXXIII; Frigerio (1997), 53-73 Figs. 2-4, 6 Tav, XI-XXIL 5. Cherstich (2002), 167-174 Taw. 85-88. κι Tomlinson’s personal papers: 1956 notebook fol. 17; Gasperini (1998), 276. © Rowe (1948) Pl. VIII. © Buttle (1957), 172 Pl. 72; Wright (1957), 300-304 Figs. 13; Stucchi (1975), 266; Jones (1993), 107. % Rowe (1942), 13-14 PI. IVD.

355

those in adapted Tomb N. 142 which are smaller (Fig. 233). This would account for the alignment of the entrances, which in this instance could be for free-standing stone sarcophagi. The antechamber in front of the triclinium poses a problem as it has formae around the walls with side loculi above them, seeming to suggest the function of a cubiculum (Fig. 238). If this is an integral part of the whole complex, then the two large pierced round-headed openings in the dividing wall and also the barrel-vaulted arcosolium would indicate a Roman rather than a Ptolemaic date (Fig. 29).

‘Type R. 2 (Fig. 233) The Kenissich complex as recorded by Pacho displays a combination of burial practices, with at the far end much smaller sepulchres cut earlier than cubicula (Fig. 10). ‘They recall the arrangement of the Tomb of the Kartilioi at Tolmeita which at present is the only provincial example (Fig. 267). These post-date the Hellenistic galleried loculus system shown in Porcher Watercolour 93 (Figs. 30, 230) and are also apparently a later alteration in Tomb N. 258 where the earlier chamber loculi have been enlarged into full height sepulchres (Fig. 225). The Amathus Tomb 151 in Cyprus is a dromos tomb, with a similar arrangement to Porcher Water. colour 93, but includes sarcophagus chambers as demonstrated in Rowe's Tomb N. 81-A (Figs. 217, 282).

Type R. 3 (Fig. 233) At the rear of facade loculus Tomb N. 89 is an adapted pair of low sepulchres, equivalent to the upper loculus level, indicating the introduction of a new burial practice in the necropolis. These can be alternatively represented as a simple extension to a loculus with a plain slab used to close it from the rest of the tomb, well represented by Tombs N. 65 and N. 36 (Figs. 219, 221), and also seen in square chamber loculus Tomb N. 365 (Fig.

223). In the

adapted chamber loculus Tomb N. 142, again at the rear, possibly utilising existing loculi, is a pair of full height sepulchres, with a rock-cut sarcophagus at the side of one of them (Fig. 223). A single example was cut later in Tomb N. 17 where the same method could have been used (Fig. 225). This recalls the small individual sepulchres shown by Tomb N. 236 leading off an antechamber, with Roman inscriptions cut later on the external facade." Luca Cherstich recorded at the rear of long chamber loculus Tomb S. 64 a pair of sepulchres altered from earlier loculi (Fig. 228)" These low sepulchres in Cyrene recall examples cut in association with columbaria as an identical pair in Thiersch Hypogeum 2 or singly in the Hypogeum of Antoniadis Garden at Alexandria (Fig. 277).® A more developed primary example is the subterranean dromos tomb at Kuklia in Cyprus, which seems more tangible evidence for their origin (Fig. 282)

Type R. 4 (Fig. 234). The interior of long chamber loculus Tomb N. 149 shows at the rear how tomb morphology changed with the abandoning of Cyrene’s loculus systems (Fig. 228). Here there is a bank of square loculus entrances forming a columbarium on two facing walls, used mainly for individual inhumation burials. The lower level resembles loculi, while the upper level consists of loculus sepulchres containing a grave. At this point it becomes comparable with Roman tomb morphology found in Alexandria; for example, the columbarium loculus sepulchres recall in shape those found at the Plinthine Hypogeum 1, which are, however, without a rock-cut grave to one side (Fig. 274). The complex of Tomb N. 364 shows an exterior bank of two rows of columbarium loculus entrances closed by plain slabs, with a space behind suitable for a single inhumation; this has definite Alexandrian characteristics recalling those in Kóm-el-Shukafa catacomb and nearby Adriani's Hypogeum no. 128 (Fig. 277). Eugenio di Valerio identified in the

© Smith and Porcher (1864) PL 35. "^ Cassels (1955), 21 Pl. Xa-b. © Cherstich (2002), 159-167 Tavv. 78-84. McKenzie (1990), 68 Pl. 195.

356

Western Necropolis a row of five columbarium loculi inside chamber Tomb W. 52, where there was an unfinished barrel-vaulted arcosolium. This combination of systems matches that seen in Anfoushy Hypogeum No. 1 where the interior of the original loculus chamber has been subsequently altered to include a brick-built cubiculum arcosolium system, possibly indicating the sequence of development for these particular burial practices (Fig. 277). IV.1.8 Cyrene Types $-T Tombs Arcaded hypogeum and triclinium (Figs. 234-235) Type S. 1 (Fig, 234). The significant Tomb of Grenna represents a new form of burial practice, which is entirely Roman. The built portico facade against the natural rock face does not survive, but fragments of it were apparently found by Bourville in 1848 (I. 3. 1 Tomb A). The rockcut interior is a square main chamber, with built arcading enclosing bays on three sides, originally with a dado of marble veneer fixed by bronze cramps around the walls, which were plastered above and probably painted with murals. In each bay the floor was covered by a mosaic with a centrally-placed, marble-veneered stepped dais, on which are specially imported marble Attic strigillated and Proconnesian garland sarcophagi, while in the main chamber are a later inserted battle sarcophagus and a klinenmonument (Fig. 1l Tomb J). A fragment showing part of a griffin’s tail, found in discarded tomb debris, may belong to one of the strigillated sarcophagi. The Tomb of Grenna recalls in plan the tomb of Gens Octavia near Rome” and the well-known garland sarcophagus matches another found by Rowe at Gabbari, Alexandria (Fig. 277). This is the only tomb where statuary was found, dating to the mid 2nd century A. D. recalling the earlier funerary statuary at Pompeii.”

Type S. 2 The largest and most impressive Tomb N. 398, pentastyle in antis, has a portico with large plain pillars lacking capitals. The Doric entablature has a metope-ditriglyph frieze and architrave with the regula showing five cylindrical guttae, but the projecting corona has no mutules or guttae and, in place of ἃ pediment, an uncut overhang of the natural rock immediately above (Fig. 8 Tomb A). The entablature does not at first appear to be Roman as it lacks a dentil course below the corona, a characteristic feature of the Temple of Zeus, rebuilt after A. D. 117 following the Jewish Revolt." Final confirmation of whether or not this tomb facade could be of the Roman era can only be provided by excavation of the Tomb of Grenna forecourt in search of an identical portico, of which the four marble Ionic columns discovered by Bourville could be a ‘main element. The interior of Tomb N. 398 consists of a square rock-cut chamber, which is greater than the whole of the Tomb of Grenna, and has a large bay in the far wall and two large recesses in one flanking wall. If the tomb is interpreted on the basis of the former type, its function becomes clearer if one includes a built arcade in the openings of the rear bay and the recesses. This implies that the corresponding flanking chamber wall was intended to be cut and built in the same fashion, and another example of a strigillated sarcophagus with griffins, only the base now surviving, provides a further link (Fig. 8 Tomb A). On this basis the bay at the rear probably served to hold a very large sarcophagus on a stepped dais. The hypogeum in Antoniadis Garden, Alexandria has pillars in the peristyle supporting a Doric entablature, but there is no dentil course and the tomb morphology is a columbarium loculus system." © Bendineli (1922), 429-432 Tav. I © Paribeni (1959)n. 38 Tav. XX; n. 40 Tav. XXIL 1; Rosenbaum (1960) n. 161 Pl. LXXXUL,3 n. 80 PL LXXIV, 2; Thorn (2001 forthcoming. ?' Pesce (1948), 333 PL LVILA-B, ® Adriani (1963-66), 143-144 no. 90, Figs. 219-222 Tawv. 64-65; McKenzie (1990), 68 PL. 195.

357

Cyrene Type T Tombs

Type T. 1 (Fig. 235). Let into the isodomic facade on the right of the entrance to the adapted ‘Tomb of the Veteran N. 173 is a marble tablet in situ, bearing an inscription to Gaius Ammonius.” If this refers to one of the Trajanic veterans who had settled in the Cyrenaica shortly after the Jewish Revolt was quashed in A. D. 117, it gives a terminus ante quem for any major alterations to the tomb." Only the interior shows any significant alterations, with the earlier Hellenistic square chamber walls, ceiling and plain loculus slabs covered in a thin layer of white gypsum. This was then painted with rectangular panels above a dado edged with a border of red and yellow bands. A variety of subjects are used depicting gladiators, horse races, hunting scenes and a garden. In the frieze above is a variety of mythical subjects, identified by name, representing Leda with the swan, Actaeon attacked by dogs, Psyche, the Parcae, Ganymede seized by the eagle and Adonis killed by the boar. The ceiling shows the painted outline of decorated beams, at present unique in Cyrene.” The facade of Tomb N. 22 is crowned by a row of rock-cut sarcophagi, recalling the arrangement used elsewhere on the eastern slope of Wadi Haleg Shaloof on Tomb N. 53 which implies that only the square chamber was cut, intended for loculi, which was eventually altered by extending the chamber at the back to receive a pair of marble block sarcophagi behind a low pilastered screen, as suggested by Professor Bacchielli (Fig. 223). This conclusion was reached on the evidence of the low dais which has a step cut into it at one side, and a concavity in the far wall, below the painted frieze. Considering this evidence, there is no record of any fragments of sarcophagi being discovered, although the space available is suitable, based on the average dimensions of a marble sarcophagus in Tomb N. 398 for example (Fig. 234). On the floor of the dais there is no imprint of sarcophagi, but an abraded ridge W. 0. 16m running right across may be connected with an earlier rock-cut sarcophagus system. The murals, again on a layer of gypsum, show a similar range of painted subjects of gladiators in combat, boxing, wrestling, a chariot race and hunting scenes. There is a more significant subject which shows the deceased person having left the underworld to join in the celebrations.“ Luca Cherstich has identified decoration of an architectural nature showing a Doric entablature with fluted columns, their capitals unfortunately obliterated, on the western wall of an antechamber above a red dado which runs all round it, in long chamber loculus system Tomb S. 64 in the Southern Necropolis. This has comparisons in Sciatbi Necropolis, Alexandria (Fig. 228).” Type T. 2 (Fig. 235). Among the rock-cut tombs Porcher recorded in 1861 is a series of three watercolour vignettes of recesses with painted wall decoration, but he did not give their location in the necropolis, nor plan their context among the surrounding tombs. The rediscovery of two of these recesses provides the opportunity to identify their purpose. One of them, shown in Porcher’s Watercolour 120,is situated in ΕἸ Mawy land, south-west of Tomb N. 132 (Figs. 29, 241),* now more inundated with hillwash, exposed H. 1. 20, L. 2. 50 W. 2. 88m. In the centre of the back wall is a slightly projecting vertical strip where the surface is roughened, with on each side a vertical red band W. 0. 04m dividing it from the decorated areas. This represents the site of the dividing wall between two loculi, probably double-level, the outer jambs of which survive at the front of the recess, demonstrating that the former Hellenistic tomb was adapted in the Roman era. ? ® ? % 7

Doc. Ant. Il, 118 n. 123 Tav. XXXIV Fig. 78b; SEG IX 235. Fraser JRS XL (1950), 87-88 PI. V; Smallwood JRS XLI (1951), 37.38 Pl. VIII; Fuks JRS LI (1961), 99. Horn (1943), 199 Fig, 30; Bacchielli (19933), 85 Fig, 10; (1995), 163-164, PL LXXIX, a Bacchielli (19954), 86-95 Figs. 11 Cherstich (2002), 159-167 Tawv. 78-84.

358

‘The decoration around the walls is now much abraded, but what can be seen is an all-over lattice design of a linked leaf pattern in deep red on a white background forming lozenges, each with a central honeysuckle flower motif in the same red, Above is a deep red horizontal band H. 0. 08m, bordered at top and bottom by a thin grey line, on top of which is the frieze H. 0. 28m, consisting of two paits of red swags, with the surface below them powdered at random with honeysuckle motifs. The two flanking walls display the same decoration, which has become seriously weathered. This resembles the decoration recorded in Porcher Watercolour 121, and in Watercolour 90 the lattice design is also depicted on the ceiling (Fig. 30).” It also recalls the design employed in Rowe's Tomb N. 83 Arcosolium 12 as dado decoration (Figs. 173, 294), and the ‘salone delle ortostati in the House of Jason Magnus has the same lattice design in mosaic, with a central motif and a border of bead and reel, identical to that used in adapted Tomb N. 226. This was also found on a mosaic fragment at Chantier Finney in Alexandria." The recess recorded in Porcher Watercolour 121, deliberately cut in the side of the forecourt of Tomb N. 258, is partially buried in hillwash, exposed H. 1. 50, L. 3. 40 W. 2. 00m. Here an entirely different form of interior decoration was used, with seven panels of counterchanged colours on the back wall and two on each flanking wall H. unknown, yellow ochre inner panel W.0.55m, red ochre border around it W. 0. 14/16m, all enclosed by a thin white line Th. 0. 008m. Above is a frieze H. 0. 69m, and Porcher indicated that a swag motif was included, only traces of it now remaining. This form of decoration can be matched with that used in various rooms of the Town House at Tolmeita."® Porcher Watercolour 122 represents the adjacent Tomb N. 259, adapted from an earlier Ionic facade loculus system where the dividing wall between the doublelevel loculi has been removed, H. 2. 05 L. 5. 46 W. 2. 96m. The decoration, obscured by recent limewash, is similar to that shown in Watercolour 121 but without a frieze. The dado below has utilised the lower part of the original loculus, seen to be plainer (Fig. 28) IV.1.9 Cyrene Types U-V Tombs Antechamber cubiculum (Figs. 235-237)

Type U. 1 (Fig, 235). The Stappard Tomb is important as itis a primary rock-cut tomb which gives clear evidence of the change in tomb morphology from the arcaded hypogeum demonstrated by the Tomb of Grenna (Fig, 234). A possible flight of steps leads down from the ground surface before the free-standing pilasters into along antechamber in front of the cubiculum with triplearcosolia, the facing one containing a lunate niche which in depth and apsidal appearance is unsuitable to have been used for any burial." The position of the pilasters recalls those often used supporting a pediment in kline chambers or arcosolia as in a sarcophagus recess in Hall M at Köm-elShukafa.'” The internal arrangement recalls Anfoushy Hypogeum 2 where chamber 2 has a low dais which, in comparison, may at present be buried under hillwash in the Stappard Tomb, Type U. 2 (Fig. 237). The practice of adapting loculus tombs as hosts for the new cubiculum system with triple arcosolia is demonstrated by Ionic Tomb N. 89, where the dividing walls between four double-level loculi have been completely removed to create an antechamber before cutting the ? "© τι % © ?* "©

Smith and Porcher (1864) PL 21. Mingazzini (1966), 21 Tav. IX,2 Tab. A room B. Adriani (1940), 44 Fig. 13 Cassels (1955), 29 Fig. 4 Kracling (1962), 225-236 Figs. 61-62 PL. LVLA. Santucci (1996), 31-35 Tavy. VIX. Rowe (1942), 36 Pls. IV M, XV.

359

cubiculum with barrel-vaulted arcosolia at the rear. In contrast, in Tomb N. 165 the dividing wall between two loculi has been only horizontally truncated above the original floor level of the carlier cut galleried loculi to form an antechamber, again in front of a cubiculum with barrel-vaulted arcosolia. The windows pierced in the facade on either side of the entrance indicate that the gallery also served a function connected with the antechamber, and raise the possibility that the original Hellenistic burials may have been left undisturbed. The practice of cutting small round-headed windows is clearly shown to be secondary by the Tomb of the Veteran N. 173, Rowe's cubiculum Tomb M. 7 and adapted archaic Tomb N. 5, in all of which the windows open directly into the cubiculum (Figs. 235-237).

Pacho recorded in the Kenissieh complex Tomb N. 66 similar cubicula leading off what

seem from his plan to be earlier systems of various forms of sepulchres, which in this case served as antechambers (Figs. 10, 233). Connected with these Kenissich burial systems which Norton explored in 1911 was a marble klinenmonument,'® the circumstances of its discovery unknown, recalling a similar marble example found in Tomb S. 359 described below (Fig. 236). Cyrene Type V Tombs Type V. 1 (Fig. 236). The large rocky hill at Mgata, now being levelled for material for the

nearby new 2000 road, contains primary Roman Tomb 8. 359 in its body (Fig. 207). The plain en-

trance into an antechamber faces an open arcade recalling that in Tomb N. 131 in appearance with a cubiculum beyond (Fig. 238). The sculpted wreath pattern over the arches is identical to the decoration above Rowe's Tomb M. 7 Arcosolium 4, pointing to its being stylistically contemporary (Figs. 236, 299)."” Cassels claimed the marble Dionysos sarcophagus originally came from here, probably from one of the cubiculum raised recesses with small shell motifs, which is of a suitable size.'® Luca Cherstich assisted in planning the tomb, and is in the process of carrying out further research on this very important monument.” Type V. 2 (Fig. 237). On the other side of the ancient road opposite Rowe's necropolis excavation is cubiculum Tomb N. 84, cut directly underneath the archaic porticoed Tomb N. 416 well above the ancient road (Figs. 34, 210). The wide antechamber has a mosaic floor with at either end a low rock-cut bench. A central open arcade leads to the cubiculum which has three arcosolia, the main one emulating a kline chamber similar to those found in Alexandria, for example in Hypogeum 2 at Mustapha Pasha Kamel (Figs. 275-276), but the case instead copying the side of a marble ‘Amazonomachia sarcophagus with a kline on top. An ossuary niche is placed above, within the arcosolium arch, which is decorated with a foliated scroll border cut in light relief, but there is no attempt to cut pilasters to represent an arcade as in Rowe's Tomb N. 83 nearby (Fig. 173). IV.1.10 Cyrene Types W-X Tombs Adapted cubiculum — formae (Figs. 236-238)

Type W. 1 (Figs. 236-237). The primary Rowe's Tomb M. 7 cut in a quarry shows an interior blind arcaded cubiculum recalling Tomb S. 359 mentioned above (Figs. 60, 236). The main arcosoIium is cut with a combined representation of a garland sarcophagus, recalling a similar Hellenistic marble example at Ephesus in Karia. On the gabled lid is a later cut Chi-Rho, indicating reuse in ?* © ?* * 7?

Pietrogrande (1930), 115-116 Fig. 13. Cassels Arch. Yellow Book fol. 38; (1955), 21, 37 PL. Matz (1968), 116-118 Taf. 21-23, Cherstich (2002), 187-190 Τανν. 97-98. Bonanno (1998), 83-95 Taw. LIX.

360

the late Roman period." The triple slots inside the case rim are similar to the double slots cut in the same position in a barrel-vaulted arcosolium in Tomb N. 196 forecourt (Fig. 238). This may be an indication that the lids were cut with joints which met above a timber batten placed across the case to support gypsum joining the pieces of the lid together. The scallop shell in a conch above a dado is also represented in Rowe’s Tomb N. 83, an adapted facade loculus tomb quarried later, again with a blind arcaded cubiculum interior (Figs. 172-174). The Hellenistic Tomb N. 226 is an adapted square chamber loculus system, which has been extended by the removal of the loculi at the rear, leaving the truncated door heads, to make a square cubiculum with three arcosolia with scallop shells in the conches without a dado below, or a surrounding arcade. The mensae, which should be tabular slabs of stone as in the Stappard Tomb, for example, are instead reused Hellenistic rockcut sarcophagus lids, cut down to fit the space, as if required in a hurry. This seems to reflect the situation encountered in Rowe's Tombs N. 83 and the adjoining N. 82 (Figs. 174, 191). The original Hellenistic square chamber has been given the new role of an antechamber, as clearly demonstrated by the rainbow mosaic floor which should have continued into the cubiculum, where a figured subject may have been rendered (Fig. 27 Tomb F)."? Its elongated bead and reel border recalls that used in the ‘salone delle ortostati in the House of Jason Magnus which in this case includes lattice work, a feature also used on the painted murals in triclinium recesses in Porcher Watercolour 120 and Rowe’s Tomb N. 83 Arcosolium 12 burial (Figs. 173, 294). Comparative representations of the

sculptured shell in a conch do not seem to occur elsewhere in Cyrenaica. They are found in the Western Necropolis of Alexandria, mainly used in an exedra connected with a columbarium loculus system, and in one case in a cubiculum with triple arcosolia (Figs. 276-277). Even the murals are only known in sarcophagus recesses as pagan themes connected with a version of the Osiris cult, whereas Christian murals in barrel-vaulted arcosolia have not survived. Type W. 2 (Fig. 236). Tomb N. 270 close to the Mudir's House, cut in a quarry, has an austere cubiculum interior with a low step running below and in front of pairs of barrel-vaulted arcosolia around three sides (Figs. 57, 236). A larger example is Tomb N. 415, also cut in the side of a large quarry close to the Kenissich, the interior described by Cassels as a ‘Large square room! for the cubiculum with barrel-vaulted arcosolia, at present filled with foul rubbish and human excrement."

Type W. 3 (Fig. 237). Rowe's Tomb N. 82 cut in a quarry, a good example of a completed plain irregular-shaped cubiculum system with barrel-vaulted arcosolia, is a marked change from Rowe's Tomb N. 83 which it adjoins (Figs. 172-173, 191). Close to these is the adapted Hellenistic Tomb N. 81, still buried under hillwash, which has two recesses possibly for arcosolia, which are square-headed. In Rowe's Tomb N. 5 the archaic burial chamber has been adapted to include a pair of barrel-vaulted arcosolia with a small round-headed window cut in the outside wall. An attempt has been made to infill the space between the portico columns to create an antechamber which, on the lack of evidence, could be Ottoman in origin. The window in this tomb is a characteristic of Rowe's Tombs M. 7 and N. 83, with others further afield beside the entrances of the Tomb of the Veteran N. 173 and Tomb N. 165, all of which have a common connection with a cubiculum system (Figs. 235-237). The adapted tomb recorded in Porcher Watercolour 90 shows additionally a change in tomb morphology, with a painted antechamber with lattice decoration around the walls, leading into a cubiculum (Fig. 30). The decoration rendered here is similar to that used on Rowe's Tomb N. 83 Arcosolium 12 dado, and painted in the triclinium recess shown ?" "2 ™©

Keil (1930), 12-18 Abb. 5. Santucci (1995), 55-58 Figs. 3, 6 Graeco-Roman El Fakharani (1956), 57 n. 1 Fig. 3 PL. 16. Cassels Arch. BlueMus.BookInv. fol.G. 2;989; (1955), 21, 30 Fig. 4.

361 in Porcher Watercolour 120, which are all in close proximity to each other (Figs. 29, 235, 294).

The upshot is that on stylistic grounds these murals are a contemporary style, and may belong to a school of painters. A similar internal arrangement is cut for Tomb N. 17 from a loculus system,

with the remaining lower part infilled with paving slabs and soil in the antechamber floor (Fig,

225). The internal antechamber walls are left plain, including the adjoining cubiculum with

barrel-vaulted arcosolia. In another tomb near a rock-cut temple precinct the arcosolium contains

an ossuary niche which in function recalls those in Rowe’s Tombs M. 7 and N. 83 cut on either side of the main arcosolium (Figs. 236, 262). The evidence for dating relies entirely on ashlar

reused for graves on the floor of Rowe's Tomb N. 82, probably matching materials used in the hurried construction of a grave for Demetria, which if connected with the earthquake of A. D.

365 gives a terminus post quem for the last burials in this tomb (Fig. 299).

Type W. 4 (Fig. 238). In some archaic burial chamber and loculus chamber tombs, the interiors became hosts to barrel-vaulted arcosolia, in the process changing the chambers’ function to cubicula. This is apparent in Tomb W. 41, which is archaic in origin (Fig. 210), and again in the Doric chamber loculus Tomb N. 181 at both ends of the chamber, leaving the place for the main arcosolium absent as if the original loculi had been utilised for the purpose, as Tomb N. 196 demonstrates (Fig. 238). This may differ with Ionic Tomb N. 192 which additionally has ἃ forma, indicating in this case that the earlier loculi were left untouched. In Porcher Watercolour 91 this is more likely, judging from the number of loculi involved. The Tomb N. 364 complex has an identical cubiculum system as an adjoining tomb, indicating in the latter that they are contemporary. The ‘Tomba nel Giardino’ in New Shahat in the vicinity of Tomb S. 412, studied by Angela Cinalli, shows a cubiculum with barrel-vaulted arcosolia at one end, recalling the adapted arrangement in Tomb N. 165, which is also a feature of the Stappard Tomb (Figs. 235, 237). In Anfoushy Hypogeum 1, columbazium loculi are associated with a cubiculum which has been added later, giving the sequence of tomb development in Alexandria, which may also be applicable to Cyrene (Fig. 277). A significant tomb identified by Eugenio di Valerio, below and adjoining Tomb W. 55, is an unfinished galleried chamber loculus tomb preceded by a long antechamber, the latter entered by a vertical shaft bordering the ancient road. This unfinished adapted tomb demonstrates that the rudimentary loculi had been re-used for Christian burials, a feature also noticed by Luca Cherstich in Tomb S. 1. The tomb had been also adapted with the addition of a cubiculum. to the side of the antechamber, recalling that cut in adapted Tomb N. 165 (Figs. 229, 237). Cyrene Type X Tombs

Type X (Fig. 238). The antechamber in Tomb N. 131 shows the establishment of a change in burial practice, with formae being made, identical to those cut in the floor of Hellenistic tombs. Formae were cut in connection with cubicula where arcosolia are involved, as demonstrated in Tomb N. 84 and in Porcher Watercolour 90 (Figs. 30, 237). They were cut individually in Rowe’s Tombs M. 7 and N. 83, an example in the latter being covered by the ashlar-built Grave 4 for Demetria who died in A. D. 365, thereby providing evidence that formae were essentially a 4th century feature (Figs. 60, 172, 299). In Tomb N. 196 it would seem that the central loculus entrance had been altered with the insertion of a door lintel, now lost, and the interior quarried with formae and also a barrel-vaulted arcosolium which possibly served as the main burial." The forecourt serves as a cubiculum with a barrel-vaulted arcosolium and forma in front, while at the opposite end is an unfinished chamber. © Thom (1998) Tav. IV,2.

362 LIST OF FIGURES CHAPTERIV

Fig. 207 Fig. 208 Fig. 209 Fig. 210 Fig. 211 Fig. 212 Fig. 213 Fig. 214 Fig. 215 Fig. 216 Fig. 217 Fig. 218 Fig. 219 Fig. 220 Fig. 221 Fig. 222 Fig. 223 Fig. 224 Fig. 225 Fig. 226 ig. 227 Fig. 228 Fig. 229 Fig. 230 Fig. 231 Fig. 252 Fig, 233 Fig. 234 Fig. 235 Fig. 236 Fig. 237 Fig. 238

Rock-cut Tomb Morphology

Nemesis of a Necropolis: destruction and vandalized tombs 1981-2000 Archaic Doric and Aeolic portico chamber tombs Type A. 1-2 Distribution of Archaic Doric and Acolic portico chamber tombs Type A. 1-2 Acolic portico chamber tombs Type A. 3 Distribution of Aeolic portico chamber tombs Type A. 3 Archaic Ionic portico and frieze portico chamber tombs Types A. 4 andB. 1 Distribution of Archaic Tonic portico chamber tombs TypeA. 4 Tonic facade sarcophagus chamber tombs Type C. 1-2 Tonic facade sarcophagus chamber tombs Type C. 23 Distribution of Ionic facade sarcophagus chamber tombs Type C. 1-3 Tonic facade sarcophagus chamber tombs Type C. 4-6; Doric open peristyle Type D. 1 Distribution of Ionic facade sarcophagus chamber tombs TypeC. 4-6 Doric pedimented fagade loculus tombs Type F. 1-2 and built facade Type E. 3 Doric built entablature/built facade loculus tombs Types E. 4, F. 1; Tonic Type F. 2 Ionic built entablature loculus tombs Type F. 2-4 Plain facaded built entablature loculus tombs Type F. 5-6 Pedimented portico tomb Type G. 1; sarcophagus-fagaded tombs TypeH. 1-2; adapted tombs Type H. 3 Doric isodomic-built/rock-cut facade, chamber loculus tombs Type 1. 1-2; composite tombs Typel.3 Ionic chamber loculus/composite tombs Type J. 1-2; adapted tomb Type J. 3; Doric tomb Type K.1 Doric wide chamber loculus tombs Type L. 1-2 Doric built entablature/isodomic-built facade wide chamber loculus tombs TypeL. 3-4 Ionic built entablature chamber loculus tombs TypeM. 1-2; long chamber tombs Type N. 1-3 Galleried chamber loculus tombs Type O. 1-2 Galleried chamber loculus tombs Type O. 3-4 Doric facade built portico/Tonic false built portico chamber loculus tombs Type P. 1-2 Unporticoed chamber loculus tombs Type Q. 1-4 Tombs adapted with triclinium and sepulchres Type R. 1; with sepulchres TypeR. 2. Tombs adapted with columbarium sepulchres TypeR. 4; arcaded hypogeum Type S. 1-2 Tombs adapted as camerae/triclinium recesses TypeT. 1-2; long antechamber tomb Type U. 1 Rock-cut arcaded cubiculum tombs Types V.1, W. 1.2 Cubiculum with antechamber tombs, Type U. 2, V. 2; tombs adapted as cubicula Type W. 1-3 Tombs subsequently adapted as cubicula TypeW. 4; adapted with formae Type X

Figs. 207-238 qV.00) qvi) qvi av.) av.) av.) qv v.12) v.12)

v.12) (v.12) v.12) (VL) (v.13) v.13) v.13) VA) av.i4) V.L45) QV.L5) v.15) qV.15-9. IV.) (v.16) van) van) (17) AV.) W139) W110) qV.19) V.110)

365

New landfill site started

5

Western Necro

ΜΕΝ .

Neeropolis

i

developed ares of New Shabat 1981-2000 vandalized rombs seen 1995-2000.

Fic. 207- Nemesis of a Necropolis: destruction and vandalized tombs 1981-2000 (IV.0.0)

364

Rowe's Tomb N.5 Pacho Tomb © \

Rowe's Tomb N.2 |

Rowe's Tomb N.7

Rowe's Tomb N.3 Pacho Tomb C

Rowe's Tomb N.9

Rowe's Tomb N.4 acho Tomb C

Mens. tdelJ et D

FiG. 208 Archaic Doric and Aeolic portico chamber tombs Type A. 1-2 (IV.1.1). 1. Conjectured pediment; 2. Quarryman’s wedge-slots; 3. TombN. 2; 4. Tomb N. 3; 5. TombN. 4;6. Klinai graves;7. Block sarcophagus.

365

Fic. 209 - Distribution of Archaic Doric and Acolic portico chamber tombs Type A. 1-2 (IV.1.1)

366

‘TombN. 416

τὰ TombW. 41 Blundell Tomb C

n Tomb W. 49

Tomb W.37

Blundell Tomb D NK:

‘Tomb W. 33 12°

—

‘Blundell Tomb D. soem

Mens. et del. Jet

Fic. 210 - Aeolic portico chamber tombs Type A. 3 (IV.1.1). 1. Later cut niche; 2. Kline grave; 3. Sarcophagi; 4. Floor grave; 5. Later cut arcosolium; 6. Klinai graves.

367

Fic. 211 - Distribution of Acolic portico chamber tombs Type A. 5 (IV.1.1).

368

Tomb W. 18 Beechey Tomb F Mens. et del. Jet D

I

A.

M]

Fic. 212 - Archaic Ionic portico and frieze portico chamber tombs Types A. 4 and B. 1 (IV.1.1). 1. Kline; 2. Truncated steps; 3. Klinai graves; 4. Capitals after Stucchi (1975) Fig. 155.

369

Fic. 213 - Distribution of Archaic Ionic portico chamber tombs Type A. 4 (IV.1.1).

370

Tomb W.7

Rowe's Tomb W. 22 TombN.3 After Μαίρίειει Note: pilaster detail not to scale

‘After Di Valerio

Fic. 214 - Tonic facade sarcophagus chamber tombs Type C. 1-2 (IV.1.2) 1. Iconic niche; 2. Niche; 3. Ionic column.

Mens et del. Jet D

371

TombW. 25

Tomb W.29

“Tomb ofthe Aniconic Niches

Tomb W.30 Tomb W.31

2 = Tomb W.27 Ü" Note Capital ilusrtions above are not to sce A" Malet

Tomb N. 407 °

Fic. 215 - Ionic facade sarcophagus chamber tombs Type C. 2.3 (IV.1.2).

‘Tomb N. 405 Group theke Im

1. Robber burrovings;2. Naiskos; 3. Tomb 1 Theke; 4. Position of Tomb N. 405; 5. Collapsed facade;6. Later cot grave; 7. Small table.

372

Fic. 216 - Distribution of Ionic facade sarcophagus chamber tombs Type C. 1-3 (IV.1.2).

373

‘Tomb W. 21 Not: Pen and elevation not τὸ scale

Tomb W. 32

‘Tomb ofthe Butcher Mens. et dd. Jet. o

2m

0

3.

Tombof Thanaros

After Bacchiell

Fic. 217 - Ionic facade sarcophagus chamber tombs TypeC. 4-6; Doric open peristyle Type D. 1 (IV.1.2). 1. Rock-cut sarcophagus;2. Niche; 3. Sarcophagi; 4. Naiskos; 5. Statue plinth,

314

Fic. 218 - Distribution of Ionic facade sarcophagus chamber tombs Type C. 4.6 (IV.12).

375

Mer Pacho

Tomb N.224

Tomb N. 65

Tomb N. 178 Beechey Tomb D Mens. t del. Jet D

Mens, Abdul Rhecm et dl. et D

Fic. 219 - Dorie pedimented facade loculus tombs TypeE. 1-2 and built facade TypeE. 3 (IV.13). 1. Inscriptions; 2. Defined area;3. Sill 4. Stairs; 5. Later cut loculus;6. Small niche; 7. Conjectured screen; 8. Wide step; 9. Later chamber loculus tomb; 10. Annexe; 11. Remains of revetment; 12. Terra rosss; 13. Remains of boundary wall; 14. Quarry face; 15. Rock-cut forecourt wall.

316

1

| |

ea

"ELSE

Tomb N. 196

‘Burton Brown Tomb F

ἢ

xL

Al Paco

ΓῚ Rowe's Tomb M.3 "Tomb N. 197

Rowe's Tomb M. 16

Tomb N.21

‘TombN. 185.

Mens.

del. J etD

Fic, 220 - Doric built entablature/built facade loculus tombs Types E. 4, F. 1; onic Type F. 2 QV.13) 1. Conjectured screen; 2. Limestone stele (N. 258); 3. Vessel/cinerarium niche; 4. Block stele conjectured; 5. Block stele; 6. Later chamber loculus tomb; 7. Rock-cut sarcophagi

377

Tod SUD

LI

ES VIN

du

l

S we

IY

LILM

i !

md

After Pacho

d

Mens. et del. Jet D

After Porcher

Smith and Porcher Tomb E

TombN.38

|

o

2m

0

5m

“Alter Pacho Tomb N. 36

ΓἫ Mens. edel Jet

Fic. 221 - Τοῖς built entablature loculus tombs TypeF. 2-4 (IV.13). 1. Rowe's Sarcophagus N. 198A; 2. Unexcavated Rowe’s Tomb N. 198A; 3. Conjectured screen; 4. Boundary wall; 5. Later chamber loculus tomb.

318

SAE oats ‘TombN. 209 Kine

TombN.24 Tomb N25

Rowe's Tomb N.83:BF

Fic, 222 —Plain fagaded built entablature loculus tombs Type F. 5-6 (1V.1.3). 1. Conjectured coping; 2. Conjectured screen; 3. CIG 5178; 4. Decorated during recent Bedouin occupation; 5. Later cut sepulchre; 6. Forecourt; 7. Ascending passage to forecourt;8. Rock-cut klinai

379

‘Watercolour 101 Vicinity of Tomb N. 293. Smith and Porcher PL. 34

IM

LCE Tir Re)

Rt

Mi xd

ill

=3

= |

|

ar : Copland Tomb. Mens. et ἀεὶ JD.

Fic. 223 - Pedimented portico tomb Type G. 1; sarcophagus-facaded tombs Type H. 1-2; adapted tombs Type H.5 QV.14). 1. Later cut adapted sepulchre; 2. TIAHPHC; 3. Destroyed pediment; 4. Later sepulchres; 5. Earlier facade locali; 6. Loc. 6; 7. Loc. 7; 8. Earlier cut long chamber loculi

380

LI

Too — u T —3 a 7j —

=== | Fi

s Tomb N. 401 Poste intended layout ]

|

‘Tomb N.357

Porcher Watercolour 92 Porcher Watercolour 96

id Fara

Mens. et del Jet D

Fig. 224 -- Dorie isodomic- built/rock-cut fagade, chamber loculus tombs Type I. 1-2; composite tombs Type 1.3 (IV.14). 1. Conjectured screen; 2. Iconic statue base; 3. Channelling trenches; 4. Unfinished quarried chamber; 5. Later cut Roman arcosolia; 6. Passage; 7. Later sepulchre.

381

TombN. 83 bis Spi and Porcher Tomb A

TombN. 21 (conjectured)

Mens. et dl JD

TombW. 80 Mens. Abdul Rheem et del.J et D

Fic, 225 - Ionic chamber loculus/composite tombs Type J. 1-2; adapted tomb Type J. 3; Doric tomb TypeK. 1 QV.1.65). 1. Pillar stele; 2. Later cut Roman triclinium recess; 3. Later cut cubiculum; 4. Wide loculi; 5. Intended loculi; 6. Early Hellenistic facade loculi; 7. Later added loculus; 8. Cremation receptacle; 9. Intended wide chamber loculus system.

382

"Afer Bonacasa

΄

~ 2000), 161

After Pacho

After Beechey

=

Tomb of Aliens. Beschey Tomb A

W. 16 B BeeTomb Toa d

Tomb W.20 pecie Toa C

] Poscher Watercolour ἢ

‘TombN. 181

am 0

2

Fic. 226 - Doric wide chamber loculus tombs Type L. 1-2 (IV.1.5). 1. Intended loculi; 2. Unfinished entrance; 3. Later arcosolia.

Mens. edel. JD

383

Mens. εἰ del. Jet D

Rowe's Tomb N. 10 Beschey Tomb E

Ian

Beechey's 1822 internal elevation AB

receptacle

Said Fara Tomb A

After Said Farj

Fic. 227 - Doric built entablature/isodomic-built facade wide chamber loculus tombs Type L. 3-4 (IV.1.5) 1. Vessel niches; 2. Cinerarium niche; 3. CIG 5163; 4. Later galleried chamber loculus; 5. Cremation receptables

384

ul

"Tomb. 102 Baron Brown Tom

Tomb N53. bis Nen.adljeD

= Porcher Watercolour

"Td.

Lp

Mente dl Lact Chesich

|

Tomb s

CL»

;

TombN.131

After Porcher

Fic. 228 - Ionic built entablature chamber loculus tombs TypeM. 1-2; long chamber tombs TypeN. 1-3 AV.15-6). 1. Stele;2. Later tomb; 3. Unfinished entrance; 4. Intended loculi 5. Later cut sepulchres;6. Antechamber; 7. Forecourt; 8. Defined area; 9. Later cut columbarium sepulehres; 10. Annexe; 11. Later cut chamber loculus; 12. Later cut sepulchres; 13. Later cut triclinium; 14. Later cut arcosolium.

385

Mens

ide. Jet.

After Porcher

C

o* Je3

[prec

Tonb 16

Mens ede JeeD

᾿

m

1

Seid Fas Tomb A Ale Sid Fani "E

Fic. 229 - Galleried chamber loculus tombs Type O. 1-2 (IV.1.6) 1. Area of uncut loculi; 2. False panelled doors; 3. Roman cubiculum; 4. Forecourt; 5. Low forecourt wall; 6. Earlier wide chamber loculus.

386

Mens εἰ del. Luca Chersich

|

|

Tomb of Aristides. Porcher Watercolour 93

Fic. 230 - Galleried chamber loculus tombs Type O. 3-4 (IV.1.6).. 1. Site of libation slab; 2. Slab, now dislodged; 3. Cistern; 4. Forecourt; 5. Later cut sepulchres; 6. CIG 5154 Ins. 27.

387

Note: Chamber loculi based, ‘on Castel ildnotes

}

TombN.ITi Pacho Tomb F

After Gismondi-Dimakopoulos u

‘Alte Tomlinson

Fic, 231 -- Doric facade built portico/Tonic false built portico chamber loculus tombs Type P. 1-2 (IV.1.7). 1. Conjectured position of inscribed statue bases SEG IX 227-231; 2. Entrance; 3. Forecourt.

388

Tomb $.388

ter Claudio Frigesio E

TombN.%0}} TombN.91 |} Tomb lj ΝῸΣ s After Borcher

‘TombS.65

Mens εἰ del. Luca Chesich

Original ‘Tomb N.59 arrangement

F a Adapted arrangement

= Subsequent arangemenı Mens. et del, JetD

Fic. 232 -Unporticoed chamber loculus tombs Type Q. 1-4 (IV.1.7)

1. False door; 2. Dentil course; 3. Hypothetical defined arca;4. Intended arrangement; 5. Forecourt; 6. Stairs; 7. Steps: 8. Conjectured enclosed forecourt; 9. Intended loculus.

389

Kenisich complex TambN.66 [Tomb N.

| After Porcher o

Tomb N.258

[

ταῖν

After Pacho

T

| Porcher Watercolour93 ‘Tomb N.236

Tomb N17

TonbN 12 Mens et del.JetD

Afer Pocher

Fig, 233 - Tombs adapted with triclinium and sepulehres Type R. 1; with sepulchres Type R. 23 v.17). 1, Sepulchres; 2. Later cut arcosolium; 3. Tridinium; 4. Sepulchres; 5. Conjectured form of ante chamber; 6. Later cut side loculi; 7. Earlier cut long chamber loculi; 8. Later cut side loculi; 9. Later cut cubiculum; 10, Earlier cut square chamber loculi; 11. Earlier facade loculi; 12. Rock-cut sarcophagus; 13. Earlier cut chamber loculi

390

Elevation CD

‘Tomb of Grenna acho Tomb]

Mens. Abdul Rhcem et del, et D.

‘Tomb N. 398 Pacho Tomb A

[ous

PahoPLLVID

Pasod Battle sarcophagus

2m ‘Mens. del. Jet D

Fic. 234 — Tombs adapted with columbarium sepulchres Type R. ; arcaded hypogeum Type S. 1-2 (IV.1.7-8) 1. Earlier cut long chamber loculi; 2. Earlier burial chamber; 3. Strigillated sarcophagus; 4. Battle sarcoph. agus; 5. Garland sarcophagus; 6. Klinenmonument; 7. Principal sarcophagus; 8. Later arcosolia; 9. Strigillated sarcophagus; 10. Conjectured recesses;11. Existing recesses; 12. Portico.

391

Tomb N. 22 acho Tomb D

TombN. 173

Suppard Tomb Mens. εἰ del, Jet D Fic. 235 — Tombs adapted as camerae/triclinium recesses Type T. 1-2; long antechamber tomb Type U. 1 (01.8.9). 1, Window; 2. Earlier chamber loculi; 3. Marble inscription; 4. Mural damaged 1998; 5. Bench; 6. Niche; 7. Low dais;8. Screen;9. Earlier cut chamber loculus; 10. Porcher Watercolour 121; 11. Porcher Watercolour

120; 12. Sarcophagus case; 13. Free-standing pillar.

392

Section CD

"

wo

Rowe's Tomb M.7 14 Ney Toa δ᾽ Tomb N.270

Rowe's Tomb N.83 Tacho Tomb E Mens t del. ee D

Fic. 236 - Rock-cut arcaded cubiculum tombs Types V. 1, W. 1-2 (IV.1.9-10). 1. Recesses; 2. Probable site of klinenmonument; 3. Cistern; 4. Unfinished arcosolia; 5. Klinenmonument;

6. Mensa slabs; 7. Partially quarried arcosolium; 8. Cistern;9. Barrel-vaulted arcosolia; 10. Klinenmonument; 11. Cinerarium; 12. Conch; 13. Barrel-vaulted arcosolia; 14. Windows.

393

Tomb N.84 Tomb N.89

sy

Porcher Watercolour 90 [ἡ x

[ausis

"o

edm

Rowe's Tomb N 5

Fig, 237 - Cubiculum with antechamber tombs Type U. 2, V. 2 ; tombs adaptedas cubicula TypeW. 1, 3 V.1.9-10) 1. Square-headed arcosolium; 2. Barrel-vaulted arcosolia; 3. Earlier cut sepulchres;4. Farlier cut facade loculi; 5. Antechamber; 6. Earlier cut galleried loculi; 7. Dividing wall truncated; 8. Windows; 9. Mosaic floor; 10. Conch; 11. Arcosolia;12. Earlier cut chamber loculi and sepulchre;13. Arcosolium; 14. Formae; 15. Painted chamber; 16. Earlier cut archaic tombs; 17. Window; 18. Infill; 19. Chamber sarcophagi

394

fom W. 4 Blundell Tomb C

Tombanel Giardino

After Said Farsi

Rowe's Tomb N.83 Pacho Tomb E.

TombN.DI

Altes Porcher

Mens et del. JD

Fic. 258 - Tombs subsequently adapted as cubicula Type W. 4; adapted with formae Type X (IV.1.10). 1. Earlier cut wide chamber loculi; 2. Square-headed arcosolium; 3. Arcosolium; 4. Barrel-vaulted arcosolium; 5. Archaic burial chamber; 6. Forma; 7. Later cut cubiculum; 8. Forecourt; 9. Later cut arcosolia; 10, Earlier burial chamber; 11. Earlier cut columbarium sepulchre; 12. Earlier cut facade loculi; 13. Con. jectured cubiculum; 14. Forma; 15. Side loculi; 16. Formae; 17. Earlier cut long chamber loculi; 18. Grave 10 raised forma.

V.1.0 Rectangular built tomb configurations

Cassels' classification obscures too many variations in the morphology of the built tombs which were classified from his field notes into six main types for the eventual publication, but in the light of Rowe's campaigns of work and close scrutiny of defined types it is apparent that the morphology is much more complex.' He realised his Type B I, such as the once imposing Tomb E.16, would ‘repay study’ (V.2.0). In 1953 Chamoux’s published statement "les mausolées rectangulaires sont de beaucoup les plus fréquents was illustrated by three isodomic-built examples of temple Tombs E. 2, E. 75 and S. 185, representing Cassels’ Type B II, which consists of 329 examples mainly in the Eastern Necropolis, combining temple tombs with Rowe’s mastaba M. 5, which on closer study is an entirely different structure (Figs. 240-241). Tomlinson later classified these as his prolific Class ΜΙ’ In Cassels’ Type B III there are only 18 examples of his built temple tombs, which include orthostat-built examples Rowe’s M. 2 combined with the different shrine tombs M. 6 and M. 8 (Figs. 239, 243), together with isodomic-built tombs such as Tombs N. 77 and N. 208 (Fig. 243). The identifications are also flawed as Rowe’s Tomb M. 2 is confused with partly buried Tomb N. 206 which, although similar in appearance, is apparently a burial precinct (Figs. 239, 246). Types B IV and B V represent square built structures which have no affinities with the previous types (V.2.0; V.5.0). Under Type B VI Cassels described Tombs W. 156-157, the former apparently a low, gabled, orthostat-built structure on a podium, at present unclassifiable because of lack of study, for which Cassels stated: ‘A large though not well built masonry thing, evidently a mausoleum for a lot of poor chaps’. The adjacent Tomb W. 157 was described as: ‘Another large affair’ and a sketch shows an orthostat-built structure with six compartments? Cassels BIL Isodomic-built temple tombs BI

Stepped mastaba tombs

Orthostat-built temple tombs Isodomic-builttempletombs Shrine tombs

Type B.

TypeD.1-2

(Fig. 240)

(Fig.241)

TypeA.2 (Fig.239) TypeG.2 — (Fig.243) TypeE.1 (Fig. 243)

The configurations of these types fall into two distinct categories, those with a central dividing wall producing two long compartments (Types A-D) and those with single compartments (Types E.G), while isodomic-built loculus tombs are also included here (Type H). ? Cassels Arch. Blue Book fol. 1; (1955), 14-17, 22. ? Chamoux (1953), 289 PL. IX 1,2,3; Tomlinson's personal papers: 1956 notebook fols, 154-156. > Cassels Arch.Blue Book fol. 16

398 V.1.1 Cyrene Types A-C Tombs Double compartment temple tombs (Figs.239-240)

Type A. 1 (Fig. 239). Entirely rock-cut Tombs N. 368-369 have double compartments cut as loculi, while in a rock-cut temple precinct near to Tomb N. 370 is a deeply rock-cut temple tomb which has an entrance leading into a square lobby with two loculi at one side (Fig. 246).* Tomb N. 102 has a pair of double-level loculi at one end, with the outline of a false door on the visible long side; at the other end any entrances are obscured by hillwash, but the tomb is similar to that in the valley below N. 362, shown in Porcher's Watercolour 119 (Fig.27). Type A. 2 Rowe's Tomb M. 2 in El Mawy land is of orthostat-built construction, but completely enclosed without an entrance (Figs. 121-122, 124). The final dressing of the roof may have been done in situ, which would account for the error made, eventually resulting in the irregular shape of the central plinth. It has double compartments, each with central divider, their internal height similar to the interior of Rowe's mastaba Tomb M. 5 where he found a limestone sarcophagus (Figs. 138-143, 241). The space available in Tomb M. 2 could contain four Cyrenaican Aslaia size coffins with burial artifacts placed at one end (Fig. 266). In the floor of the cleared compartment is a rock-cut grave under the site of the wooden coffin (Fig. 124). Any coffins would probably disappear without trace, as metallic fittings may not have been used. What remains of the burial assemblage indicates a provisional date of mid 4th cent. B.C. (Fig. 308). Although this unique tomb is similar in appearance and construction to the neighbouring Tomb N. 206 burial precinct, Cassels noted that the cornice was like that of Rowe's M. 2, with ‘plain slabs’ for the sides (Fig. 246). Nearby Tomb N. 204 is identical but smaller, the flanks made up instead of three orthostats, and showing an entirely different interior arrangement by having double-level compartments, Beside Rowe's Tomb N. 1988, Tomb N. 199, although in ruins, shows an identical construction (Fig. 221).

Cyrene Type B Tombs Type B. 1 (Fig. 240). The truncated Tomb N.1 bis 1 with later added temenos wall displays long, slender isodomic blocks similar to those used in the construction of Rowe's Tomb M.15, the later circular tomb surrounding it (Figs. 82, 87). The lower compartment H. 1.20 m is suitable for a coffin to be contained within it. The selection of known artifacts from this earlier tomb and those from Beschi's Tomb S. 80 bis indicate multi-burials at different times, demonstrated more clearly in Tomb N. 1 bis 1 by the glass balsamarium which could be Roman, contrasting with a Hellenistic ring seal possibly representing Berenike II, ca. 273-221 B.C. (Figs. 89-90, 99, 157)

Type B. 2 The ruined Tomb W.104, built above an earlier rock-cut facade loculus tomb within an enclosed sunken burial precinct reached by a flight of steps," recalls Porcher's representation of Tomb S. 186 showing a double compartment tomb without a divider or entrances (Fig. 28)? It would seem that the burial practice was again likely to be coffins which were lowered, as in Rowe's Tomb M. 2, through the roof (Fig. 124). The arrangement and sequence of development * ? © ? * *

Cassels Arch. Ph.23 Cassels Arch. Blue Book fol. 12; Cassels (1955), 27 Fig. 4. Cassels Arch. Blue Book fol. 22; (1955), 28, 43 Anti (1927), 167-169 Figs. 1-2; Bacchielli (1995a), 239-248; Caccamo Caltabiano (1998), 105 Tav. ILI Ghislanzoni (1915), 158 PL 79. Cassels Arch. Blue Book fol. 14; (1955),33.

399 also resemble that of Rowe's Tomb M. 8, with no evidence for a defined area connected with

either tomb system (Figs. 104, 108).

Cyrene Type C Tombs

Type C (Fig. 240). Cassels described the ruined Beschi Tomb E.140 as: ‘almost an embarras de richesse of carved architectural ornament -- full [Ionic] entab, architrave with triglyphs - presumably door lintel, column semi-attached to presumably central door jamb -- with no other door decoration. 4 statues of marble in not v. good condition V. of it.\(Fig.164)." Beschi's excavations uncovered the tomb's triple-stepped and splayed base and he published one of the four female half-figures noted by Cassels."' The interior shows an antechamber in front of the double compartments which would probably, like Tomb E. 75, be double-level with chamfered sills to support the separator slabs." Another better preserved example in Cyrene, published by Horn in 1943, is set back above and behind the remains of an earlier Doric built facade loculus tomb similar in appearance to Tomb N. 178, probably against the site of the rear boundary wall to the earlier tomb's original defined area which has disappeared, recalling the system noticed in Tomb W. 104 above (Figs. 219, 246).” Tombs of this type further afield stand at Messa and Ras εἰ Hilal (Figs. 264-265, 272). The well-known Maioletti Tomb 5.185 has a splayed base and overlooks an enclosed burial precinct with isodomic-built temenos walls. Maioletti’s made-up drawing shows a combined system with steps leading down to another lower built structure inside." The latter, which is in ruins, is placed in front of a built corridor with pairs of long loculi at the rear. These continue upwards as two upper levels inside the body of the built temple tomb, which would account for the lack of external entrances. The central dividing wall in the temple tomb shows an unusual offset chamfered sill for separator slabs immediately under the lintel stones for the roof, as if intended for a further stage which was never implemented.” This lower system is emulated by the layout used in Tomb N. 59, an adapted facade loculus tomb (Fig. 232) V.1.2 Cyrene Type D Tombs Isodomic-built stepped mastabas (Figs.241-242)

Type D. 1 (Figs. 241-242). Rowe's Tomb M. 5 exterior, on the basis of his Tomb E. 160, would probably have been stepped, as Cassels correctly thought (Figs. 133, 144). The interior arrangement is unique as the two four-division compartments are separated by a divider stone used as a lintel, below which there were possibly panelled interior doots decorated with iron nails and bosses (Figs. 285, 314)."* The insertion of a limestone sarcophagus left headroom which strangely has no function (Fig. 251). The disturbed burial artifacts point to a first half 3rd cent. B.C. interment (Figs. 311-314). In contrast, Rowe’s Tomb M. 2 arrangement has two compart"5. 5. ® © * ® “

Cassels Arch. Blue Book fol. 37; (1955), 45, 41 Cassels Arch. Blue Book fol, 38; Beschi (1972), 186-196 Figs. 40-50; Stucchi (1975), 175 Fig. 9. Chamoux (1953), 290 Pl, IX,3; Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ph. 7916-3166 (dated 29. v. 39); Tomlinson Arch. Ph. 22-30. Ghislanzoni (1915), 159 Fig. 79; Horn (1943), 199 Abb. 31. Maioletti (1931b), 327 Figs. 48; Stucchi (1975), 176-177 Figs. 174-177. Cassels Arch. Grey Book fol. 5 confirms my comments Macridy (1911), 198 Figs. 8, 202 Fig. 16a.

400

ments with a similar height separated into two parts by a single orthostat central divider, and probably had a similar burial practice (Fig. 239). Type D. 2 (Figs. 241-242). Cassels failed to recognize Tomb E. 160 as a variation of Rowe's Tomb M.5, as it was still unexcavated (Fig. 133). He compared the latter with Tomb 5.21: ‘Like Rowe's M5, this consists of an outer shell w. inner binding. Section shows how shelves were cantilevered across. The space at the front between last of wall& pod. seems to show. . it bad a small forecourt (& 2. a door). The accompanying sketches show a section like that of Tomb E. 160 (Fig. 133 Section E-F) and a simple plan of two compartments with a chamber at one end. Today Tomb S. 21 is less exposed for close scrutiny with only the corner of one compartment visible.” This raises the possibility that Rowe's Southern Room’ in Tomb E. 161 was in fact not destroyed, but only an altered chamber (Figs. 132, 137). Due to backfilling, this part of the tomb is now inaccessible, so any reassessment would involve more excavation. The finding of Panathenaic amphora fragments in the western compartment indicates that this tomb contained a similar burial to Rowe's Tomb M. 5, but the lack of compartment height indicates that a different form of burial practice was in vogue, more suitable for a bier than a coffin, also applicable to Rowe's Tomb E. 161 ‘Main Burial Chamber’ (Figs. 135-136, 250, 301).

Type D. 3 (Fig. 241). Tomb N. 132, described in Cassels’ fieldnotes as a ‘simply massive built Box of large blocks, is built against an isodomic-built burial precinct. It is very similar in construction to Rowe's Tomb E. 160 but differs by lacking an outer wall of stepped isodomic work, and the compartments lack dividers for individual burials (Fig. 133). More significantly, the lintel stones at one side have a boundary wall built on top of them, enclosing the forecourt of Tomb N. 131 in which they stand (Fig. 29). This means that there is no superstructure above mastaba type tombs, and that access to the burials was from one end and not from above. Type D. 4 (Fig. 241). A smaller example of this is a pair of Tombs N.186-187 by the bend in the road to Apollonia in El Mawy land. They recall that described by Burton Brown for “Tocra A” where disturbed inhumation burial artifacts of the 4th cent. B.C. were recovered.” The lintel stones on Tomb N.186 show a splay around the top surface, which may indicate the presence of some form of superstructure which has disappeared. This could be a number of things, ranging from a pedestal monument emulating Tomb N. 87, or simply a column as demonstrated on the later built example at the Marina el Alamein Tomb (Figs. 245, 273). V.13 Cyrene Type E Tombs Panelled orthostat shrine tombs (Figs. 243-244)

Type E. 1 (Figs. 243-244). Partly exposed recently is the significant Ionic Tomb N. 1 bis 2 with broad recessed panels, without the characteristic regulae or guttae in the architrave, On the roof plinth is an orthostat side panel still in situ, forming the remains of a small naiskos, a unique survival of this aspect of tomb morphology (Figs. 95, 100). The cluster of 4th cent. B.C. artifacts remaining within a small confined area H. 0.70 L. 1.24 W. 0.82 m whose size is dictated by a divider still in situ, gives an indication of the related primary burial practice. Rowe's Tomb M. 8 overlooking Wadi Haleg Shaloof is the best-preserved example (Figs. 107), and was described by Tomlinson under his Class N variant as having side walls consisting of ‘slabs set up on edge... decorated externally with verCassels Arch. Yellow Book fol. 4; Cherstich (2002), 196-198 Tav. 103 5. Cassels Arch. Blue Book fol. 14. Burton Brown (1948b), 152 Fig. 2.

401

tical “panels”, alternately raised and sunk’ but be evidently found no shrine tombs in the Eastern Necropolis, where the outer walls of tombs in that class were ‘left plain’.” Rowe's unexcavated Tomb M. 6 in El Mawy land (Figs. 123), with pilasters in antis, has no indication of an internal divider, although its size is identical to that of Tomb M. 8. Both tombs show the distinctive Ionic style of decoration as clearly displayed on Rowe's Tomb M. 15 (Figs. 82, 96). The roof plinth of Tomb M. 8 shows a congestion of sockets for block stelai at the end furthest from the entrance, whereas the part close to the entrance is noticeably free, perhaps indicating that iconic half-figures and their statue bases were placed here. The double-level compartments height is less than 0.95 m, 0.15 m lower than that of Rowe's Tomb E. 160, making it unsuitable for coffins to be used in the burial practice, the alternative being low wooden biers. The recessed vertical panels in the orthostats recall the construction of wooden counterparts, with alternating thick tenoned uprights holding thin tongued panels between them in grooves to form recesses, all held together by means of wooden pegs to horizontal members which house the mortices needed to receive the uprights, a method used in the unique 5th cent. B.C. Cyrenaican Aslaia coffin (Fig. 266). A simpler construction is demonstrated by a Ptolemaic coffin in Cairo Museum, where the sides are made from three horizontal boards with seven vertical planks fixed τὸ them at intervals Type E. 2 (Figs. 243-244). Tomb N. 14, bordering the ancient road, was complete when

illustrated by Beechey in 1822, with a plinth on the roof and probably without entrances.” Surviving today is the whole of the side facing the road, constructed of one massive panelled orthostat, while the plain back, terraced into the hillside, is formed of several individual pieces. The interior has no divider, and the lower level is cut below the orthostat into the natural rock.

Type E. 3 (Figs. 243-244). The smaller Tombs N. 125-126 built on the rock surface below El Mawy land are both double-level and lack entrances, all four sides being panelled, They match an identical tomb in the Mghernes cemetery, their furthest known counterpart (Fig. 271). V.1.4 Cyrene Types F-G Tombs Ionic isodomic-built temple tombs (Fig. 243) Type F (Fig. 243). The appearance of the pediment of Tomb N. 52 overlooking Wadi Haleg Shaloof seems to be emulated by the rock-cut facade of a square chamber loculus Tomb N. 142 in EI Mawy land (Fig. 223). The interior H. 1.35 L. 2.80 W. 90 m, a double-level loculus with an entrance, would seem only suitable for funeral biers to be used, if compared with the space available in nearby Tomb N. 1 bis 1 (Figs. 97, 240). A much larger example surmounts the tomb shown in Porcher Watercolour 94 and is contained in a defined area with temenos walls, recalling the arrangement of Rowe's Tomb M. 8 (Fig. 108). In appearance the tomb is similar to Temple Tomb Bat Ras el Hilal and others at Messa, but differs by not having an entrance (Figs. 265, 272) Cyrene ‘Type G Tombs Type G. 1 (Fig. 243). Terraced into the hillside in El Mawy land is Tomb N. 208, the upper level devoid of any mouldings in the isodomic work and roof lintel stones other than the typical plinth running along the length of the ridge. The interior is double-level with no vertical divider, ® Tomlinson's personal papers: 1956 notebook fol. 156. * Cairo Egyptian Mus. Inv. 67567. ® Beechey (1828) PL. 11; Buttle Arch. Ph. 17/8 Thesis PI. 87.

402

and noticeable here is the increased height of 1.68m for the upper level and its width of 1.281 making it suitable to hold four Cyrenaican Aslaia size coffins to be placed inside with ease (Fig. 266). The lower level is completely rock-cut with an exterior stepped base, a characteristic of Rowe's Tomb M. 2 construction (Fig. 239). Its step has been cut into later, probably in order for an entrance to a lower tomb to be cut. Although this is supposition, it is supported by the arrangement seen frequently in the necropoleis, where a built tomb surmounts a rock-cut one. Type G. 2 (Fig. 243). On the hillslope at the edge of Rowe's necropolis excavations stands Tomb N. 77 in a burial precinct (Figs. 165, 200). Small sockets in the roof lintel stones provide evidence for some added decoration, probably the embellishment of antefixes, noticed elsewhere on the lids of large Type A rock-cut sarcophagi in a temple precinct (Fig. 246). Similar in appearance to Tomb N. 208 but half its size, itis a single-level example, the interior suitable only for a block sarcophagus such as that in Rowe's Tomb M. 4 with room above (Figs. 144, 251). V.1.5 Cyrene Type H Tombs Isodomic-built loculus tombs (Fig. 243)

Type Η.1 (Fig. 243). Terraced into the sloping hillside, Tomb N. 27 shows a high built rectangular podium, on which are the entrances to five double-level loculi, their plain door surrounds composed of massive blocks, and the roof formed by a covering of lintel stones.”

Type H. 2 (Fig. 243). In Cassels’ publication he described Tomb S. 2 only as "Type B', a built ‘square structure with an entrance on the north side’ leading to a central chamber ‘off which five compartments opened on either side.’ Tomlinson recorded this tomb as: ‘Foundations and lower courses. Approximately square in plan.’ The importance of this tomb on the Balagrae road, which Luca Cherstich has recently studied, lies in the fact that it is an entirely built loculus system recalling the plans of subterranean rock-cut long chamber loculus tombs and unporticoed chamber loculus tombs (Figs. 228, 232). It also echoes the built construction of loculus tombs in the Dokuz Sokak Necropolis in Rhodes and Charmyleion in Kos (Fig. 283).

V.2.0 Square built tomb configurations Pacho's 1825 plan of the city and its surrounding necropolis is annotated in places by the word ‘Tou’, with his use of the term ‘Tombeau’ for the mausoleum tombs he recorded in Cyrene and Tolmeita implying a different meaning (Fig. 267). Pacho's "Tour seems in this case to refer to a much taller structure such as a tower tomb, for example like that of Gasr Stillu near Cyrene, but in annotating a similar isodomic structure such as the Cyrene city wall tower overlooking Wadi bel Ghadir, Pacho shows this larger and identifies it as (Rumes d’un Chateau), avoiding the use of the word ‘tour’.® John Cassels studied, on 18th March 1954, his Type B I tombs. Significant among these was the built Tomb E. 16 which in his ficldnotes is described as a ‘v. large mound. Evidently a high square erection. No traces of a circular structure: it seems likely [a long chamber loculus system] was the internal arrangement. This wd. link this monument w. M.5'2® This may represent a Type E. 4, recognised by Luca Cherstich below. For another, Tomb E. 72, now probably destroyed, ® Cassels (1955), 14; % Cassels Arch. Blue ® Pacho (1827) Plan = Cassels Arch. Blue

Tomlinson's personal papers: 1956 notebook fol. 78; Cherstich (2002), 191-195 Tavv. 99-102. Book fol. 4 opp. 168. Book fol. 25; Tomlinson Arch. Ph. 22-10.

403

Cassels gives further observations by describing decorative architectural elements: ‘A large rectangular mound. It seems to have had four parallel chambers on top (cf N. 251), underneath some sort of large presumably stepped podium. On W. fes of entab (Delphi prof. w. lion'cornice) ‘and semi engaged column(s) not from doorways. Scannellated. Needs study.’ Tomlinson's notes describe this tomb differently: ‘Large pile of ruins in a roughly square sunk, surrounding court. Building probably square, with walls running across.” The morphology of this tomb’s burial system is unclear from the available evidence, demonstrating the need for annotated sketches to fully understand what had been seen. Cassels’classified Types B II-III represent rectangular tombs (V.1.0), whereas square built tombs are Type B IV, and his Type B V combined pedestals with stepped stele monuments, the latter redefined here as burial furniture (V.5.0). This consists of three individual types:

Cassels BIV Mausolea — TypeA 245) Monuments Type B (Fig. 245) BV Pedestals. — TypeC (Fig. 245) His classification does not cover other square built tombs, including burial precincts or plots, neither does it cover defined areas, other than their built screens above loculus tomb facades (Types D-G). A more detailed account of burial furnishings is given in Chapter VII (Figs. 287-305).

V.2.1 Cyrene Types A-C Tombs Mausoleum and monuments (Fig. 245)

Type A (Fig. 245). The false mausoleum Tomb N.180 first recorded by Pacho overlooks the ancient road to Apollonia (Fig. 10). It has a square rock-cut podium cut with three double-level loculi, and shows a splayed sill on top. Above is a triple-stepped base supporting a recessed panel on three sides with pilasters in antis, and it is unlikely, because of its construction, that there was any cavity in the monument itself. Over the recessed panel bordered by Ionic tongues the entablature has a Doric metope-triglyph frieze with a cornice bearing lions’ heads, and the remains of a stepped pyramid above. The splayed sill is commonly found as a built base around temple tombs at Messa and Ras el Hilal (Figs. 265, 272). Examples in Wadi Haleg Shaloof show the same uncommon combined form of decoration, which occurs on facade loculus Tombs N. 21 and N. 36, pointing to a late 4th century date (Figs. 36, 220-221). In appearance Tomb N. 180 recalls the larger example known as the ‘Lion Tomb’ at Cnidus in Lycia. Cyrene Type B Tombs

‘Type B (Fig. 245). The built podium of Tomb N. 191 below EI Mawy land, where part of a moulded isodomic base to a structure above it survives in one corner, may be an example of a built compartment system which seems to have had a metope-triglyph frieze, a fragment of which is nearby.” The stepped pyramid near this podium is unconnected, and is more likely to be the base for a small pillar stele, judging from the empolion cut on top (Figs. 256, 258). A much small® Cassels Arch. Blue Book fol. 32; Tomlinson’s personal papers: 1956 notebookfol. 140; Arch. Ph. 2231; (1967),251 PI. 47b; Stucchi (1975), 166 n. 4. % Cassels (1955), 16 Pl. VII. 7? Stucchi (1988), 266-267 Fig. 33. ® Stucchi (1988), 304305 Figs. 96-98.

404

er and simpler monument is Tomb N. 245, of which only the built stepped base part survives, corbelled over ἃ rock-cut grave underneath, demonstrating the more common form of burial practice expected to be used in this type. A better preserved example survives at Zawani, on which the reconstruction is based (Fig. 271). Another example of this type may be Tomb N. 168, only described in Cassels’ fieldnotes as ‘pyramid type with one burial: preserved as high as the c. reversa’; his sketch shows a triple-stepped base with recessive mouldings on a rock-cut podium, into which the burial cavity is cut." An even smaller example is represented by Tomb N. 87 on the lower hillslope below Rowe's sarcophagus excavations (Fig. 34), which has probably lost its built splayed base and stands independently above and behind Tomb N.90's presumed defined area (Fig. 232)? Cassels’ fieldnotes include a small annotated drawing of what appears as an outline of a ‘rock-cut’ grave underneath, but his reasons for giving this are unknown.” The size of the stepped pyramidal superstructure is obviously a suitable alternative for Rowe's stepped bases (Fig. 258). Cyrene Type C Tomb Type C (Fig. 245). A much plainer and smaller example is Rowe's Tomb M. 17, which recalls the appearance and size of a statue base (Fig. 56). This particular monument, reassembled by Maioletti, could be placed on top of a stepped pyramid, resulting in a monument resembling one at Sciatbi Cemetery, Alexandria with which Rowe compared it; this had underneath it hydriai in Hadra ware containing cremations, and monuments similar in appearance were found at the nearby Hadra Cemetery (Figs. 274-275).

V.22 Cyrene Types D-F Tombs Burial precincts and plots (Fig. 246)

Type D.1 (Fig. 246). At first orthostat-built Tomb N. 206 appears exactly like Rowe's Tomb M. 2, where the burial artifacts would indicate a mid 4th cent. B.C. date (Assem. V; Figs. 239, 308). However, there is no roof, this being merely represented by coping stones, and the expected internal compartments are non-existent, suggesting that this tomb has a different function. The interior demonstrates this by a series of vertical orthostats, which are probably placed on a socle around a grave, or alternatively represent a burial chamber that has lost its lintel stones. Such a construction was commonly used for archaic circular tombs, which seems to suggest that an earlier tomb was later enclosed in an isolated precinct or burial plot (Figs. 247-249). Type D. 2 Luca Cherstich recently discovered in the Southern Necropolis, along the line of the ancient road to Balagrae, four smaller examples unregistered by Cassels, which he calls ‘tombe costruite quadrate’. Their orthostats are still in position around pairs of rock-cut graves covered by tabular lids, and seem to emulate the larger examples in Type D. 1.” Cassels recorded other examples which are outlined below under island sarcophagi (V.4.3; Fig. 252). Cyrene ‘Type E Tombs Type E (Fig. 246). ‘The isodomic-built temenos wall of the large burial precinct abutting Tomb N. 132 (Fig. 241), has distinctive sloped coping and corner acroteria. It gives the external # Cassels Arch. Blue Book fols. 18, 26. ® Stucchi (1988), 249-250 Figs. 1-3, » Cassels Arch. Blue Book fol. 10. % Cassels Arch. Blue Book fol. 21; (1955),28 » Cherstich (2002), 210-215 Tavv. 116-120.

405

impression of a temple tomb, but the monument is square, with an internal span of 6.40 m, currently filled with hillwash. It recalls the temenos wall built around temple Tomb N. 1 bis 1 (Fig. 97), but in this case seems to have the function of a precinct, with sockets for block stelai in the coping which possibly indicate the presence of sarcophagi within, and may be connected with a rock-cut tomb at one side. This arrangement can be more clearly demonstrated by a temple precinct in the vicinity of Tomb N. 370, terraced into the hillside, which contains various tomb types, all rock-cut, These consist of a temple tomb adjacent to a square chamber loculus system with a facade statue recess comparable with Tomb N. 258, which it seems to emulate (Fig. 225). Facing these, two large Type A sarcophagi form the corner by the entrance, on whose lids is a series of small, regular sockets. These sockets occur again between the acroteria on a pair of Type A rockcut sarcophagi on the same terrace as Blundell Tomb D overlooking El Mawy land (Figs 16, 210). They recall examples on temple Tomb N. 77, and could be the traces of attached antefixes (Fig.

200).

Cyrene Type F Tombs

Type F (Fig. 246). Built on the valley floor below El Mawy land near Tomb N. 124 is an isodomic-built burial plot which has an internal area of 8.00 square metres and a wall thickness of 0.60 m, deliberately filled with terra rossa, inside which two limestone block-cut sarcophagi have been asymmetrically placed, recalling the appearance of Attic examples of periboloi (Fig. 285) Cassels in his fieldnotes comments on finding a few similar structures in the Southern Necropolis Tomb ‘5.279 B sg. enclosure for sarcs”and in the Eastern Necropolis for Tomb E. 244 he describes the ruins of an isodomic-built burial plot as: ‘Enclosure on three sides of one course of masonry. Couple ofthick slab $'s to be seen.” He also describes Tomb E.71 as: ‘A square enclosure inside which are several sarcophagi... The sarcophagi inside are of two kinds, a) the type w. acroteria & a box in the middle b) a massive affair of big slabs w. heavy thick plain slabs to close it. The lack of other known examples may result from the difficulty in recognising them when in ruins or partly buried, as their number should equal that of the circular burial plots (Fig. 249).° V.2.3 Cyrene Types G-H Tombs Defined areas (Fig. 246)

Type G.1 (Fig. 246). Above the Doric built facades of Tombs N. 178 and N. 196 are the remains of isodomic screens with, immediately behind them, separate revetment walls to restrain the deep imported layer of terra rossa in the defined areas at the rear from moving forward and pushing the screens and statuary from the entablatures (Figs. 39-41, 43, 219-220). This apparently happened in the case of Tomb N. 179 where the whole facade has collapsed into the forecourt, revealing the defined area behind, which had been quarried and terraced into the hillside, and an isodomic wall with sloped coping stones built on top of its boundary line to restrain further hillwash from falling into it (Fig. 219). The apparently modest defined areas of these rock-cut tombs are only approximately three metres in depth, corresponding to the original quarried length of the oculi below for a single inhumation burial. They appear to be entirely enclosed with no access into them, resembling in character some loculus tombs at Cova Necropolis, Rhodes (Fig. 283). ?* » ?* »

Cassels Cassels Cassels Cassels © Cassels

Arch. Arch. Arch. Arch. Arch.

Blue Book fol. 9; RoweII PL. 19b. Yellow Book fol. 29. Blue Book fol.48. Blue Book fol. 31 Blue Book fols. 32, 45; Yellow Book fol. 29; (1955), 14.

406

‘Type G. 2 (Fig. 246). The Ionic Tomb N. 39 in Wadi Haleg Shaloof has surviving boundary walls and steps leading up from the forecourt which point to a different purpose, elucidated by Rowe's Doric Tomb M. 3, where a block sarcophagus was found immediately behind the screen, indicating that in some cases these areas served as a burial precinct rather than a peribolos (Figs 10, 23, 110, 116, 304)." The only complete surviving isodomic screen stands on Ionic Tomb N. 183 with its decorative cornice 1.40 m high. The statue plinth in front only shows a cut socket for a marble pillar stele in the middle above the loculus entrance (Figs. 220, 256). The defined area behind is still buried in hillwash, and because its contents are concealed its purpose is unclear. In Rowe’s Tomb N. 83-BF the defined area contained no evidence for burials, but a roughly-built boundary wall corresponds to the quarried loculi below (Figs. 175, 178) Type G. 3 (Fig. 246). Plain facade loculus Tomb S. 227 has no screen, just an empty square defined area surrounded by two courses of isodomic blocks, which completely encapsulates the four loculi below.”

Type G. 4 (Fig. 246). A tomb identical to S. 64 is seen in Porcher Watercolour 94 which shows the interior of a long chamber loculus tomb with an antechamber. The latter has an isodomic-built defined area which contains a built temple tomb and is open to the forecourt below, but is only large enough to enclose the area of the antechamber (Figs. 228, 243). This suggests that the temple tomb was erected and the enclosing wall subsequently built around it, giving the area a definite function. Luca Cherstich found that Tomb S. 74 had a defined area only over the front part of the long chamber loculus system, possibly suggesting an extension of the chamber. The small isodomic-built defined area above facade loculus Tomb N. 59 is the finest. example, surviving complete except for its screen and statue plinth which have fallen. Entirely enclosed by a low wall with a sloped coping, the defined area is full of terra rossa without any indication as to its function (Figs. 104, 108).

Type G. 5 (Fig. 246). Unporticoed chamber loculus tomb Tomb S. 66 (Fig. 232) illustrates perfectly how an isodomic-built defined area covers the space of the loculi below. In this case, when part of the tomb was extended at a later date an addition was made to the wall of the defined area on that side, in order to increase the enclosed area. This seems to establish that the

purpose of defined areas was to demarcate spaces which were occupied and to protect the tomb beneath from subsequent damage by delineating its boundaries.“

Cyrene ‘Type H Tombs Type H (Fig. 246). The rock-cut stepped base and lower part of the orthostat panelled screen above Rowe’s facade loculus Tomb N. 34 seem to be a later adaption (Fig. 103), recalling in appearance the nearby panelled shrine Tomb N. 1 bis 2 (Fig. 243). The defined area above and behind this loculus tomb shows a well-dressed floor with no trace of a parallel panelled orthostat, indicating that the area was suitable for use as a burial precinct. This would account for the unfinished sarcophagus lid being cut in its boundary wall and the lack of a sill for statuary (Fig. 304). The intention seems to have been to place a block sarcophagus within this precinct, as Rowe's Tomb M. 3 shows (Fig. 116). No other examples of this type have been identified at present.” © © © * ©

Petrakos (1976), 5-8, 34-37 Figs 3, 16; Garland (1982), 160-166 Fig. 10. Ghislanzoni (1915), 156 Fig. 54; Cassels (1955), 19 Pl. VIId. Cherstich (2002), 185-186 Tavv. 94-96, Cherstich (2002), 167-174 Τανν. 85-88, Uncini (1985), 93 PL 7.IIL 1

407

V.3.0 Circular built tomb configurations The classification in Cassels'fieldnotes consisted originally of four main types, which defined rings of orthostats, shown in his key as crenellations, as Type A; those having a continuous ring, shown as a vertical band of rectangular orthostats, as Type B; those ‘w. sq. pod.’ as Type C; and ‘with roof& sq. pod.’ as Type Ὁ.“ When his work reached publication the four types were given Roman numerals and put in reverse order with another, Type I, being added after Tomb E. 47 had subsequently been identified through his fieldnotes as having an interior construction entirely different from that of the original Type D, discussed more fully below.” However, this new typology did not tally with Rowe's, published a year later, which gives an opportunity to reassess here the two typologies, as Rowe's archaeological evidence was not fully available for Cassels to combine with his fieldwork classification of the unexcavated tombs he saw. Cassels (A)CV — Rowel (B) CIV — —— (C) C TII ΠῚ (DICH

CI

-

π

Ὑ

—Orthostat-built burial plots Orthostat-built burial plots Isodomic-built burial plots Isodomic-built burial plots

Type A TypeB TypeC ^ — TypeD ὀὠ

(Figs. 247-248) (Figs. 247-248) (Fig.249) (Fig.249)

Orthostat-built burial plots

Type E.

(Fig. 249-250)

Roofed tumulus tombs

IV — Rowe's Tomb M. 22

TypeF — (Fig.250) Mghernes — (Fig.271)

The new classification of the circular tombs is based initially on those which are apparently for ustrinums, represented by Types A-B and their distribution (Figs. 247-248). Their subsequent development is represented in Types C-D, where there are inhumations in sarcophagi or cists inside a peribolos, in some cases raised on a podium (Fig. 249). With the introduction of a stepped crepidoma and decoration in Types E-F there is a marked change in size and tomb morphology, finally developing a roofed tumulus in Type F (Figs. 249-250). Rowe's Type IV does not seem to occur in Cyrene, and is irrelevant to this classification. Cassels noticed a variant of circular periboloi in the form of ‘D-shaped ones’, and these were also seen by Tomlinson who made them his Class L: 'rare.. the circular drum is replaced by a built “horseshoe”, apsidal with a straight front and short straight side walls’ such as S. 276 ‘Marked as round tomb on Cassels plan, this isin fact horseshoe, with the straight side facing the road. Walls orthostat type. Rubble fill’ No mention is made by either man of burials inside, and Tomlinson reflected that this type may represent an exedra.® V3.1 Cyrene Types A-B Tombs Orthostat-built burial plots (Figs. 247-248) Type A (Fig. 247). Rowe's large Type I Tomb M. 9 is diagnostic of this type, with a socle and orthosiats placed vertically at intervals. Beschi cited evidence for a ustrinum in the interior, and the stemmed kylix M. 153 found by Rowe has a date of ca. 500-490 B.C. (Fig. 315). Professor Stucchi identified other examples, Tomb S. 256 and one to the east of Tombs S. 218-219; these, = Cassels Arch. Blue Book fol. 1. # Cassels (1955), 12,22. Cassels (1955), 14; Tomlinson's personal papers: 1956 notebook fols. 103, 135, 154.

408 although too small for inhumations, could contain a ustrinum, but are unexcavated, and because of this, their function is unconfirmed.”

Cyrene Type B Tombs

Type B. 1 (Fig. 247). Professor Stucchi identified the small Tomb E. 236, possibly built on a socle, with the diagnostic difference of a continuous ring of vertical orthostats. Cassels in his fieldnotes recorded the existence of a pair of ‘heavy lid type coffins inside’, the description recalling those used in the larger Tomb N. 119 mentioned below (Fig. 249). ἢ Type B. 2 (Fig. 247). Another small example cited by Professor Stucchi, Tomb S. 242, also possibly built on a socle, shows the orthostats turned on their sides to form a continuous horizon: tal ting.” This seems to be the precursor for larger circular burial plot tombs such as Rowe's ‘Tomb M.4 mentioned more fully below (Fig. 250) V3.2 Cyrene Types C-D Tombs Socle and podium built burial plots (Fig. 249)

‘Type ΟἹ (Fig. 249). Below El Mawy land Tomb N. 119 shows a double-stepped base and possibly two courses of orthostats laid horizontally, with a coping. The interior contains a blockcut sarcophagus partially buried in terra rossa, whose position suggests that the original intention was for a pair containing inhumations, a construction also used on the preserved tomb in the Friday Market. Both resemble in appearance Rowe's Tomb M. 14 without a podium (Fig. 249) Another orthostat-built example, recorded by Luca Cherstich, is Tomb S. 235 which contains a central large block-built cist, with beside it the base of a small sarcophagus.” Type C. 2 (Fig. 249). The original published plan of Rowe's Type I Tomb M. 9 erroneously combines the built cist grave from his adjoining Tomb M. 10 (Fig. 150), which by its construction and size matches the later Hellenistic ‘main burial chamber’ in Rowe's Tomb E. 161 (Figs. 135136, 301). This suggests that the tomb was subsequently adapted, becoming the host for a later burial. Professor Stucchi’s reconstruction of this tomb is correct in principle, but the confusion has arisen because of Rowe’s published plan. Luca Cherstich recently found two unregistered examples of Type A outside the limits of Cassels’ Southern Necropolis which show inside a pair of block sarcophagi with flat lids recalling those inside the developed Tomb N. 119 above, suggesting that these sarcophagi were inserted above a ustrinum.”

Type C. 3 An isodomic-built example, unregistered by Cassels, in the vicinity of Tomb 8. 250, was recorded by Luca Cherstich. It stands raised above the edge of the ancient road, and consists of a citcular peribolos containing a single block sarcophagus off-centre, its dislodged lid lacking acroteria and plinth. The asymmetrical position of the sarcophagus suggests that space was intentionally left for another to be placed beside it.“ © Dent (1985), 334-336 Fig. 28.2; Stucchi (1988), 350-351 Figs. 169, 171-174. 5 Cassels Arch. Blue Book fol.46. % Cassels Arch. Yellow Book fol. 26. ® Cassels Arch. Blue Book fol. 13; Cherstich (2002), 226-228 Tavv. 132-133, ? Rowe I, 6-7 Fig. I; Stucchi (1988), 350-351 Fig. 170; Thorn (1994), 106 Figs. 4-5; Cherstich (2002), 230-232 Tav. 136-137. # Cherstich (2002), 228-229 Taw. 134-135.

409

Cyrene Type D Tombs Type D. 1 (Fig. 249). Rowe's Type ΠῚ Tomb S. 77 (M.14) is a good example of a tomb with apparently the same construction as Tomb N. 119 being built on a rock-cut square podium (Fig. 249). The interior shows a pair of double-level cist graves and block-cut sarcophagi which were already in place before the undecorated drum wall was built later round them, forming a circular burial plot (Fig. 163)" Type D. 2 (Fig. 249). The isodomic built podium of Tomb N. 253 has an orthostat-built drum on a stepped base. Contained in the podium are four randomly-placed, block-built sarcophagi with tabular lids. V.3.3 Cyrene Type E Tombs Crepidoma burial plot (Figs. 249-250)

Type E.1 (Fig. 250). Rowe's Type II Tomb M. 4 shows a noticeable development, the square podium being replaced by a stepped crepidoma on which sits a base course, revealing its unfinished state by the lack of decoration, which would have been identical to that used on Rowe's Tomb E. 161, supporting a double ring of orthostats with a coping (Fig. 132). The large interior space has one small cist grave no. 2 in the middle, leaving ἃ vast area which could serve as ἃ temporary peribolos for subsequent burials, recalling the same arrangement found in Tomb S. 85, which in this case seems not to have a crepidoma (Figs. 147-150). It may have been the intention to add a number of internal concentric ring walls later, for the purpose of raising the tumulus which Rowe conjectured (Fig. 149) Type E. 2 (Fig. 249). Hamilton described an untraced tomb which may belong to this type: ‘circles of five or six feet high, surrounding a sarcophagus of the usual form. Most of them are in a very dilapidated condition, but there is one still nearly entire. It is formed of three layers of good masonry, making a square platform, on which the sarcophagus is placed, with a circle inscribed in the square of the base, formed by a ring of stones placed endwise in juxtaposition, no cement remaining between them; their dimensions are about five feet by three.” V3.4 Cyrene Type F Tombs Crepidoma with roofed tumulus (Fig. 250)

Type F.1 (Fig. 250). Rowe's Tomb E. 161 is an example of a completed tomb where all the constructional features were in place from the beginning. The decorated outer drum wall is similar to that of Rowe's Tomb M. 15, judging from the base and the surviving entablature fragments (Figs. 82, 320 nos. M. 193-194). An inner revetment wall behind was built to retain the raised tumulus, and a stone-lined shaft constructed, reaching down from the top to the main burial chamber. No evidence was found to confirm that roofing tile segments were used, but the circle of roof paving may hint at its original existence. However, the lack of internal concentric ring walls needed to support it seems to indicate that, within a border of roofing tiles, the centre was deliberately left without a stone covering, This method of creating a circular built structure with a roofed tumulus heralds a radical change in Cyrenaican burial practices, as there seem to be no predecessors other than at Messa (Figs. 135-136, 265). The main burial chamber was similar in > Cherstich (2002), 216-221 Tawv. 121-125. % Stucchi (1988), 352 Fig. 178, ? Hamilton (1856), 73.

410 size to that built in the Phrygian Choban Tepeh tumulus, but if Rowe’s recording can be believed it was much lower, and because of this would only be suitable for a bier (Figs. 280, 301).

Type F.2 (Fig. 250). Cassels’ field notes on Tomb E. 47 lack description of the inner and outer drum walls and any dimensions; what is known of this destroyed tomb is now only possible to verify by using Rowe’s Tomb E. 161 discussed above as a basis to follow the original description: ‘A podium of 3 steps: the foundations are of parallel walls, on top of which the podium is laid... On this stood four concentric rings of masonry: in the centre lie two slabs presumably sealing a burial compartment or merely to bold up middle of roof. The roof presumably consisted of 4 rings 5* Tt seems that Cassels was trying to describe a euthynteria supporting a triple-stepped crepidoma showing recessive mouldings, on which stood an outer drum wall and an inner revetment, with two further concentric walls within. The existence of the two paving slabs indicates the pos sibility that a inner skin of such slabs could have existed, on which would be laid the stone roofing, tile segments, now lost. If calculations are based on the length of the paving slabs in Rowe's Tomb E. 161, which were 1.95 m, this would indicate the intervals required between each concentric wall and suggest that Tombs E. 47 and E. 161 were of identical size, and if this is the case, then their external appearances would be very similar, only the interior differing by the central burial area being circular. The concentric walls would be constructed successively higher towards the centre, making the burial chamber the height of a standing person. Type F. 3 Rowe's Type V is Tomb M. 15, a composite, half the size of his Tomb E. 161, but displaying the finest example of Ionic decoration on a tomb (Figs. 82, 97, 135). It has no internal revetment because the interior contains an earlier temple tomb and its truncated northern temenos wall, forming support for paving slabs below the roofing tiles; the interstices could possibly be filled with stonemasons’ chippings. If the earlier structures had not been included the main burial chamber would probably be circular, compatible with supporting the paving and roof tiles and reflecting the arrangement of Rowe's Tomb M. 22 at Mghernes (Fig. 271). The dating for this tomb relies initially on the identification of the portrait ring seal which, if it represents Berenike II, daughter of King Magas, would give a terminus post quem of 221 B.C. for the final burial, but the finding of a black-glazed lamp suggests a previous burial a century before (Figs. 89-90). The subterrancan chamber is big enough to contain a wooden coffin of the same size as that used in the Cyrenaican Aslaia tomb (Fig. 266), and if so would account for the numerous sockets found on corresponding sides in the shaft apart from those intended as footholds, which I have used when negotiating the shaft (Fig. 97). This would imply the possibility that a large coffin was lowered in stages by poles wedged in the sockets across the shaft, and by ropes. Derek Buttle identified this tomb in his thesis as belonging to his ‘High Cyrenean period’, matching the Cyrenaic Treasury at Delphi, dedicated between 330 and 326 B.C. Trecently visited the extensive ruins of Tomb E.1, which stands on a platform with a similar arrangement to M. 15, showing inside the remains of a mastaba like E. 19.” Luca Cherstich studied Tomb S. 78, also on a podium, but the original arrangement of the interior is unknown. Type F. 4 Tomb S. 78 has, surrounded by a deep trench, a rock-cut square podium in which is cut a small subterranean rectangular chamber loculus system on the south side, and in the north side, according to Luca Cherstich, a single, very small loculus. On the podium is an isodomicbuilt crepidoma and its drum, which contains terra rossa, but at present no evidence appears for any burials within it^

% Cassels Arch. Blue Bock fol. 27; (1955), 12; Stucchi (1988), 343 Figs. 162-163. 7. Cassels (1955), 88. © Cherstich (2002), 221-226 Tavw, 126-131

Anu

V.4.0 Sarcophagus configurations

The earliest, possibly inaccurate, pictorial record by Cervelli in 1812 showed a sarcophagus with a hipped roof-shaped lid. This was followed by the Beechey brothers with a description and sketch of 1822 (Fig. 4) and George Warrington’s intention (which never came to fruition) to remove sarcophagus lids with a ‘small patent winch’ in 1827." Eighty years later, during archacological work by Richard Norton on the slopes of Wadi Haleg Shaloof, a few sarcophagi were opened and inscriptions recorded (Figs. 34-35). In 1933 Maioletti published his ‘sarcofago monolitico’ beside the ancient road, 9.65 m west of Tomb N. 14 below the Antiquities Department (Figs. 243, 258). Cassels produced a definitive summary of the sarcophagi, including an earlier Italian photograph showing a partly cleared enclosure above ΕἸ Mawy land, the first study of such a configuration prior to Rowe's sarcophagus excavations. Burton Brown's description of the interiors of two archaeologically cleared sarcophagi with their inhumations and associated burial artifacts is still the only account to be published (Figs. 38, 44). Tomlinson recorded rock-cut sarcophagi as his Class O and noted that they were ‘not found in the East necropolis, except along the main road 10 the East, and then only beyond the point where I ceased to number the tombs’, probably referring to those in the vicinity of E. 243-244.° It was probably these clusters of sarcophagi which Hamilton saw in 1852, describing them as: ‘large groups, rising one above the other, on the tops ofthe low bills out of which they are cut. The four sides of some of these sarcophagi stand clear of the rock, which is levelled all round; in others, only three sides or two are thus freed; many are in connected ‘groups, three or four in a line, with no other external separation than a small space between their lids, and a narrow watercourse, to drain off the rains falling from their sloping roofs.’ The first accurate measured record of rock-cut sarcophagi in a significant archaeological context was made by Rowe in his Enclosure N.83-BK during the extensive clearance of sarcophagi in his final two campaigns, which gave an opportunity to assess this much neglected aspect of Cyrene’s tomb morphology (Figs. 165, 297)." Luca Cherstich recently discovered a square sarcophagus enclosure, the first to be recorded in the Southern Necropolis, with two rock-cut sarcophagi on each side in an identical layout to the one seen by Cassels, mentioned above. All the sarcophagi in the Cherstich enclosure have acroteria and roof plinths, one of which has a socket for a half-figure cut in it^ My new classification of sarcophagi is dependent on Rowe's pioneer archaeological work and based on lid configurations, which have been discussed previously (Figs. 304-305). Following on from these, additional examples, mainly in the Northern Necropolis, have to be included. Cassels S — Block-cut sarcophagi Types AD (Fig. 251) 8. Βούκουι Types AD (Fig. 251) Rock-cut island sarcophagi (Fig. 252) Orthostat-built (Fig, 252) Cremation caskets and false

© © © © ^^ ©

Types E-F

(Fig. 252)

Cervelli (1825), 28 PI. TII Fig. 11. Beechey (1828), 463-464, unpublished plate p.464; PRO FO 160/48 Misc. Maioleti(1931b), 322-333 Fig. 2. Cassels (1955), 10-11 PL Ib, editorial caption error: ‘South Necropolis’ should be ‘Northern Necropolis Tomlinson’s personal papers: 1956 notebook fols. 156-157. Hamilton (1856), 74. Rowe Il, 7-12 Figs. XII-XIII Pl 6a Cherstich (2002), 235-237 Tavv. 140-141.

412

Sarcophagi fall into two main types, based on their mode of quarrying. The predominant rock-cut examples are emulated by those which are entirely cut away to separate them from the limestone, identified here as block-cut. Their difference in size and the lid shape is a noticeable characteristic (Types A-E), also the need for a central plinth (Figs. 304-305). Unusually large examples of sarcophagi are tabled below, to demonstrate other comparative examples in addition to those found by Rowe (VII.17.0) Sarcophagus

Metres

Type A wide (limestone, block-cut) Rowe's N. 198A

lid case

1.42 1.42

(Fig. 109)

N.224

lid — H.0.681.2.93 W. 142 case H. 155 L. 2.86W. 1.50

(Fig. 251)

N. 145

lid case

H.0,901.3.25 W. 1.66 H.154

(Fig. 251)

Monolitico

lid

H. 0.60 L. 2.75 W. 1.53

(Fig. 258)

‘Type A wide (limestone, rock-cut)

case

H. 0.70 L. 2.90 W. — H.155 L. 2.88 W.

H. 140 L. 2.75 W. 1.53

It seems that one was allocated a space within which the required sarcophagus was commissioned, and then cut and paid for in stages. The method used to create a sarcophagus can be demonstrated by Rowe’s Sarcophagus N. 81-QQ, where the first stage is represented by the cutting of the case exterior and placing of a tabular lid with terminal lifting bosses which were eventually removed. A deep continuous channelling slot was then made on top of the solid case on all four sides and the interstices removed, following which the interior was finally dressed (Fig. 304). The tabular lid was then cut with the typical gables with acroteria. In most cases the central plinth was cut for a block stele or half-figure to be placed on it later, but Rowe's Sarcophagus N. 81-X was not provided with a plinth at all (Figs. 255, 305). Because of their weight, lifting the lids poses problems for later burials, and also because any funerary furniture placed on their plinths would have to be temporarily removed before subsequent interments could be made. The series of sockets on Rowe's Sarcophagus N. 83-BJ clearly demonstrates that stelai were replaced when later burials were made (Fig. 257). Inscriptions on stelai are generally well-cut, and relate to single individuals buried inside, but sarcophagi show subsequent inscriptions sometimes cut on the lid slopes, usually in large uneven letters, as for example on Rowe's Sarcophagus N. 81-AI (Fig. 297, 304). This indicates the possibility that burial furniture may still have been present on the plinth, or alternatively had been discarded and the inscription for the subsequent incumbent cut on the lid as an economy. This lid may have been replaced the wrong way round as, unlike all the other inscribed lids, it does not face into the enclosure, but inhumations and burial artifacts relating to this sarcophagus have been extensively robbed, rendering it impossible to verify whether later burials were present (Fig. 426).

415 Ν.4.1 Block-cut sarcophagi (Fig. 251)

A marble block sarcophagus with recessed panels on the sides of the case, rescued by the Antiquities Department from a recent New Shahat development site, recalls the provincial larger Gast Jebr examples (Fig. 272).° These obviously copy wooden prototypes, such as the Cyrenaican

Aslaia coffin (Fig. 266). Another marble sarcophagus found in New Shahat is much plainer, recalling an inhumation burial in a sarcophagus recently discovered below the ruins of a built monument at Apollonia, pointing to their use in tomb morphology and burial practices.” These

marble sarcophagi are more commonly found on the shores of Lydia and the Aegean islands, and

at present are known in North Africa only in Cyrene, pointing to strong trade contacts with the lions’ feet, standing on a moulded basestone, resembling others from the necropolis at Taras, a

Eastern Greeks." In the Antiquities Department's collections is a false marble casket resting on Western Greek colony on the coast of southern Italy (Fig. 251). The Type A limestone example in the forecourt of Tomb N. 224 matches an isolated sar-

cophagus of similar size in front of Rowe’s Tomb N. 198A, probably forming part of a nearby enclosure complex (Figs. 29, 109). In Rowe’s Tomb M. 14, contained in a burial plot, are three Type B sarcophagi with their lids exposed (Fig. 304). None of these has a central plinth, and a tenta-

tive explanation for this is that any stelai placed on top would not be visible from outside, and

would instead be placed on the tomb’s ring wall, as demonstrated by the sockets on the isodomic-

built burial precinct below El Mawy land (Figs. 163, 243). The sarcophagus found in Rowe's Tomb M. 5 presents another, more permanent burial method over that of the more common

perishable wooden coffin (Fig. 133). It also differs in the low appearance of the lid, which emulates marble examples, and it probably copies wooden examples used in rock-cut loculi (Fig. 298). This could be demonstrated by placing it in Rowe’s Tombs M. 16 and N. 10, pointing to some form of module standardisation (Figs. 219, 227). Examples of false caskets were found in Rowe’s

necropolis excavations, probably covering small rock-cut inhumation burials (Fig. 305).

V.4.2 Rock-cut sarcophagi (Fig. 251)

Concentrations of sarcophagi occur on the necropolis outskirts, with those on the northern and western sides cut mainly on the slopes of the upper plateau.” They occur most noticeably below the ancient road to Apollonia which runs though the Northern Necropolis, where they are generally ter raced into the hillslope laterally in stepped rows, as can be seen by Norton’s 1911 excavations in Wadi Haleg Shaloof (Figs. 20-23, 32, 34). The steep eastern side is suitable for cutting a variety of facade loculus systems (Figs. 219, 221), whereas on the western side the hillslope is more gradual, and because of this is more suitable for cutting sarcophagi, in the process causing the abandonment of defined areas above the integrated rock-cut tombs (Figs. 33-35, 220, 225, 235). This is also a characteristic of Rowe's excavations of sarcophagi where they integrate with earlier tombs (Fig. 165). © Uncini (1985), 87 PL 7.1, 1-2; Western Necropolis case H. 0.84 L. 2.08W. 0.89 m. ® New Shahat lid H.0.29 (L. 208) W. 0.88 m case H. 0.63 L. 2.08 W. 0.88 m; Example from Paros, Hitzl (1991), 35 Abb.14, Apollonia sarcophagus burial artifacts match the range found in sarcophagi by Rowe, consisting of: Red figured: Pans. thenaic amphora with lid; two small squat oinochoai. Black-glazed: ribbed oinochoe; squat pelike; small bolsa; pyxis; two olpai; two single-handled collared cups; two globular salts; two concave-sided salts; askos; one lamp; one tazza. Unslazed wares: one wine amphora; amphora; two pyriform olpai; two unguentaria; small handled cup; one collared bol; one lamp (Information from Abdulkaderel Muzeiny). % Hitzl (1991), 94-109, 146-151 Beil. V. ® Huntings HRS. WO(2)/79/Cirene. 5 Nov. 1949. Frames 24730-24787, 24820-24878,

44

A noticeable difference in their arrangement is that they are used to form rectangular enclosures, laid out in one instance as triple interconnecting enclosures (Figs. 166 E-F, 203). Many of the rock-cut loculus tombs have sarcophagi bordering the limits of their forecourts, usually as rock-cut examples such as in Tomb N. 183 (Fig. 220), but below this in El Mawy land are larger Type A sarcophagi like Cassels’ Tomb N. 145, described as "to sarcophag? terraced against the hillside. Their function seems more likely to be for alternative inhumation burials than ἃ charnel, as implied by a sarcophagus-facaded square chamber loculus tomb in the same area (Figs. 223, 241). This is further substantiated by Maioletti's ‘sarcofago monolitico’, which is one of an isolated pair, and has a low rock-cut dais in front intended for a small table (Figs. 258, 295). In the vicinity of Tomb N. 276 are terraces of monolithic Type A sarcophagi in pairs, one showing square lifting bosses below the acroteria. In contrast to those described above, Rowe's Sarcophagus N. 83-Bl, of a similar size, had a single burial, whereas his Sarcophagus N. 83:8] was multiburial, the latter pointing to classical origins, based on the numismatic evidence of Rowe's M. 800-801 with a date range of 475-375 B.C. for some of the interments (Figs. 304, 366). The indent on the lid plinth of a Type B sarcophagus near Tomb N. 370 is that of an aniconic bust of a type dated by Beschi c. 480-460 B.C., pointing to these being contemporary with the larger examples mentioned above (Fig, 255). In Burton Brown’s Cyrene A and B, the primary inhumation burials produced the first tangible evidence of the range of associated artifacts, and gave a dating of mid4th cent. B.C. (Figs. 38, 44). This was further substantiated by the numismatic evidence of Rowe's M. 740, a coin dated 308-277 B.C., found with multi-burials in Rowe's Sarcophagus N. 83-BH (Fig. 360). The most significant Type C example is Rowe's Sarcophagus N. 81-Q, which gives positive evidence for the placing on the lid plinth of an aniconic half-figure which seems to have come originally from a naiskos (Figs. 254-255). Although excavated, nothing is known of the burial or its associated artifacts, other than on the circumstantial grounds of a group of complete vessels registered during clearance of Rowe’s Lower Enclosure N. 81-B (Figs. 202, 392-393). The lid used in the vicinity of Tomb N. 354 seems to be a composite of a stepped base for burial furniture additionally serving the function of a lid (Fig. 258). Rowe's Sarcophagus Group, terraced into the hillside, and not forming part of an enclosure complex, demonstrates the coexistence of nartow sarcophagi with broad caskets (Figs. 188, 305). These narrow lids in Rowe's necropolis excava-

tions, apparent in isolated areas, may indicate the intention to build a wall around them to form a burial plot (Figs. 163, 246). The smaller Type D is demonstrated by Rowe's Sarcophagus Group N. 83-BO, but the related burial practice is ‘Robbed’. By its size, it would be suitable for an inhumation if compared with those used for cremations (Figs. 252, 375).

V.4.3 Island sarcophagi (Fig. 252)

In Rowe's Enclosure N. 81-AB is an isolated cube of natural rock, topped by a pair of narrow lids belonging to Rowe's Sarcophagi N. 81-AI and AJ (Figs. 206, 304). This at first seems to be a quirk in the particular enclosure configuration, but a similar, larger arrangement occurs below and to the west of the Mudir's house where there is a group of raised island sarcophagi (Fig. 57). The exposed graves cut in it are arranged as a pair, with a single grave across at one end, and lids, now missing, had been placed over them. An unusual lid construction, not noticed elsewhere, occurs in Norton’s 1911 excavations near Robinson 22, where a sarcophagus shows a lid cut in two parts with the joint showing along the ridge. In the vicinity of Tombs S. 68-69 two block-cut sarcophagi with tabular lids, deliberately half-buried, are surrounded by a built stepped base. Nearby and probably

415

belonging to this pair were large orthostat pieces which, although incomplete, were an integral part, sitting on the stepped base as a screen and recalling the appearance of Tomb N. 206, as if to emulate a small burial precinct (Fig. 246). These sarcophagi resemble examples used inside isodomicbuilt burial plots or socle isodomic orthostat-built burial plots, such as Tomb N. 119 below El Mawy land (Figs. 246, 249). Recalling this, Cassels’description with sketches of Tomb S. 284, ‘for sarcs w burials Lorthostat section] moulded top & bottom & [recessed panelled] sides’ seems to portray, erected around the cases of the sarcophagi within, panelled orthostats which he likens to Rowe's shrine Tomb M.8 in external appearance (Fig. 107).” He was probably describing a smaller version of orthostat-built Tomb N. 1 bis 2 defined area (Figs. 243, 246), and it also seems to be what he observed for Tomb E. 235 as: ‘Slabs outside to hold coffins put inside. [Cyma reversa] moulding at bottom, and one at top too? roofed. 70 cms high. Heavy lids." In the vicinity of Tomb N. 105 is a pair of block-cut sarcophagi, again with tabular lids, which in this case are above the ground surface with a built step placed around them. Cassels recorded in his fieldnotes for Tomb N. 252: ‘This is in fact two stone sarcopbagi, both hollowed out of single pieces of rock, closed by flat slabs & surrounded by four long slabs with steps cut in them’.” It appears that island sarcophagi probably represent a family group, and it is noticeable that where block sarcophagi are used, there are no indications of stelai or other associated monuments V.4.4 Orthostat-built sarcophagi (Fig. 252)

Only three examples now stand in a row in the vicinity of Tomb N.216, the orthostats placed on a built stepped base. One which is more complete retains the central piece of the lid in situ, with the central plinth showing identical socket configurations to Rowe’s Sarcophagus N. 81-GG, perhaps to contain a metal holdfast connecting the stepped stele basestone (Figs. 258, 297). If the lid were restored with pedimented ends, it would look remarkably like a smaller example of Rowe's Tomb M. 2 which it emulates in appearance and construction (Fig. 124). In ΕἸ Mawy land Tomb N. 124 is a partly buried smaller example showing the same construction as before, but the exterior orthostat panels are cut with pseudoisodomic courses as if emulating the larger Tomb N. 208 nearby (Figs. 243, 246). These seem to represent primary small single-compartment temple tombs built to the accepted size of sarcophagi. V4.5 Block-cut cremation caskets (Fig. 252)

‘The casket integrated with two small shrine Tombs N. 125/126, if restored with a pedimented lid on the basis of the mouldings used on the case, recalls in appearance Rowe's Tomb M. 2 in EI Mawy land above, as if representing a temple tomb and implying that the two types are contemporary (Fig. 239). The lower part of a casket in limestone with recessed panels sitting on a basestone near Tomb N. 384 recalls those represented at Gasr Jebr (Fig. 272). A much smaller, plainer example is Rowe's block-cut Sarcophagus Casket N. 83-1 which had lost its lid (Fig. 304) but matched in size rock-cut examples represented by Rowe's Sarcophagus Caskets N. 83-BR and N. 83-BT, the latter containing Assemblage LXXVI of burial artifacts (Figs. 188, 305, 371-372). The Museum casket L. 0.53 W. 0.30 H. 0.34 m seems to have a different function in compar-

5. Cassels (1955), 17. ™ Cassels Arch. Blue Book fol. 46. Ὁ Cassels Arch. Blue Book fol. 27.

416

ison with those found on the necropolis terrain. One end shows an open rebate for the missing tabular lid with a three-line inscription below, the position of which makes it probable that it was inserted in an open square niche with the inscription visible, possibly a variation of the niches described by Hamilton (Fig. 261). An example of this use is demonstrated by similar sized caskets with gabled lids, some also with inscriptions cut at one end, which were found in situ inside a row of square niches in the facade of an isodomic-built tomb at ‘Ai Giannis’, Rhodes.“ Of two comparable Rhodian examples of caskets, one shows similar dimensions L. 0.45 W. 0.38 H. 0.36m and another, at present in the Castello, contains a gilded wreath placed on top of a cremation, clearly illustrating the burial practice related to these.” FURNISHINGS

V.5.0 Statuary, stelai, gravestones and other furnishings

The main interest in burial furniture was initially concerned with epigraphy and sculptures, with Norton recovering from the necropolis a range of funerary sculptures and inscribed stelai, to which Oliverio added in his epigraphic publications, In 1947 Burton Brown photographed a collection of female half-figures at Cyrene, the prints of which are untraced, including those found in his Tomb C, which had been reinstated above the entablature (Figs. 39, 45). Chamoux published the primary account of these and included examples of aniconic and iconic busts and halffigures." In Rosenbaum's publication the corpus included the collection of known Roman funeral busts, which Richard Goodchild demonstrated on Tomb N. 44 in Wadi Haleg Shaloof had fitted into the cluster of niches above the entrance.” A modest collection of surviving sculptured gravestones was also included, mostly found elsewhere in Cyrenaica.” Beschi's outstanding definitive work in the study of female half-figures included Rowe's statuary from his campaign of excavations. He was able to put these in their proper context, a fact clearly demonstrated by his realisation that Rowe’s M. 1040, 1045 aniconic half-figure was an integral part belonging to his Sarcophagus N.81-Q lid plinth, a point overlooked by Rowe (Fig. 255). The only classification made by Cassels was his Type B V, confined to those monuments restored by Maioletti over twenty years before (Figs. 48, 55-56, 259), and consists of stepped stele monuments including pedestals, the latter more appropriate as a built monument (Fig. 245)." Rowe's primary work in recording these furnishings gave a glimpse of the funerary practices in his necropolis excavations, relating to votive deposits, tables, socket configurations on the central lid plinths of rock-cut sarcophagi and statuary (Figs. 295, 297, 324). " These form part of a much wider range of material presented in the following order: Cassels

τ ” ™ ”

ΒΝ

Aniconic - Iconic Statuary Pillar - Block Stelai Monuments—Gravestones

(ΕἾρ5. 253-255) (Figs. 256-257) — (Figs. 257-261)

Alternative Burials - Votives | (Figs. 261-263)

CLRbL, 55 Fig. 34; Berges (1996), 95 Tav. 64,1. Fraser (1977), 11-13, 42-43. Chamoux (1953), 294-297 Pls. X-XIII. Rosenbaum (1960), 16 PL II, 1-2, 4 ® Rosenbaum (1960), 124-127 Pls.CI-CIII. © Cassels (1955), 17, 22. © Fairman Arch Rowe Phs. 118-119, 164, 126-128, 155, 158; Rowe II,2, 6, 14,20 Figs. VII, XIII Pls. 4a-b, 202-c, 28a.c, 30a, 31b.

a V.5.1 Aniconic - Iconic Statuary (Figs. 253-255)

Aniconic busts (Fig. 253) Aedicula tomb facades show niches of a distinctive form which seem to be an integral part of the tomb (Fig. 217). This is clearly represented by two tombs which face each other across Wadi Halag Stawat, with these niches above the entrances. On the eastern side the Tomb of Abdul Rheem tympanum shows a shallow niche outline of high shoulders with an elongated head which appears to represent a bust, above a 0.20 m deep epistyle sill. On the opposite western side, Tomb W. 152 shows a deep niche for a normal-proportioned bust within a pedimented naiskos, placed above what appears as a recessed panel. The latter feature is shown on a small table, and is a representation of a flat-lidded casket (Fig, 258). The busts contained by niches such as that on the Tomb of Abdul Rheem seem to be elongated aniconic marble examples with long wigs, crowned with a low polos, or alternatively another elongated version which shows no iconography other than a flat top, from the Apollo Sanctuary." However, in comparison, the known size of such busts shows that, on their own, they are unsuitable, being a third less in height, but this is explained by the high shoulder and deep epistyle sill, which suggest that a small table or casket was placed on the sill, with the flat-backed elongated bust above set back and fitted into this particular shallow niche (Fig. 253). This arrangement would resemble in its constituents the example across the wadi on Tomb W. 152 where the niche is deeper, and because of this is suitable for a bust in the round. Above the entrance of Tomb S. 193 is a similar naiskos containing a bust niche for a normally-proportioned head with polos. The small drilled holes on the frame belong to the Roman period when it served later as a funeral bust niche. This in comparison with Rowe's M. 451 small limestone head points to a wig being present, implying that the face was more likely to be aniconic (Fig. 338). The niche cut on Beschi’s Tomb shows a space which could contain a half-figure, recalling the outline of the only provincial example of a limestone figure found at Umm Azia near Merj, or alternatively a bust on a casket (Fig. 265). The marble aniconic busts mentioned above seem to have served another purpose in a position where they were more exposed, as they have a profile in the round, more suitable for sarcophagus lids (Fig. 255). They were dated by Beschi to 480-460 B.C. for elongated and ca. 460 B. for normal busts; Rowe's example and that from Umm Azia suggest a similar date. The Apollo Sanctuary bust shape points to alternative iconography of which little is known, except for a marble example reused as a Roman funeral bust, indicating that the cult had declined, and accounting for the rarity of these aniconic busts in the necropoleis.” Iconic half-figures (Fig. 254) The tympanum niche on Rowe's Tomb N. 8 is too shallow to have held a half-figure, even as a sculpted tabular piece of marble (Figs. 74, 296). The only option left in the well-dressed space would be ἃ painted mural which is more likely, judging from Norton's description and Rowe's M. 1332 aniconic half-figure where pigments had been used (Fig. 588). However, the niche silhouette points to an iconic half-figure without a statue base, the right arm raised as if the hand holds the mantle. In the deep niche above Tomb W. 22 this seems to be reflected (Fig. 214), where the iconography corresponds to some 5th century examples Beschi Type H where the right arm is similarly raised." The sculpted panel above Tomb N. 17 Loc. 2 entrance shows iconography of a triad: a representation of a pedestal stele in the centre (Fig. 259), on either side supporters on statue bases of a female half-figure similar to Beschi’s © % © * ©

Ensoli (1992) Tav. XVI; Valentini (1996), 298-306 Figs. 1, 9, 11-14. Beschi (1972), 210, 212 Fig. 61, 1-2 Rosenbaum (1960), 113 Pl. XCI, no. 239. Dawkins (1911), 301. Beschi (1972), 241 Fig. 75, item 35.

418

Type I from Tomb S. 51and a small herm with left arm crooked as if holding a caduceus. Thiss represents a statue recess where a similar triad would have stood, as Tomb N. 258 demonstrate of Wadi (Figs. 225, 256). Similar broken marble herms lie among tombs on the western slope limestone Similar Aphrodite.” of Temple the from that than other Haleg Shaloof, unrecorded examples probably existed, indicated by Tomb N. 149, where a discarded stepped base is suitable for a sculptured triad (Fig. 258). The generally accepted version of herm bears a bearded male head with close-fitting wig of three rows of tight curls across the forchead, a poor example of which came from the Apollo Sanctuary, but at present is unknown from the necropoleis. "However, a contrast is presented by the broken marble herm shaft, Rowe’s M. 202 from his Tomb E. 161, as a marble female aniconic head, Rowe's M. 185 was found nearby, perhaps in association with it, raising some points for consideration (Fig. 137). The shaft would need a head and possibly an inscribed basestone, and would have been placed on the nearby northern projection facing the ancient road. Rowe described the ‘knobbed staff in relief with a ‘slof’ at one end, possibly intended for an inserted bronze embellishment, such as a rectangular-shaped ferrule. Extensive damage at the top could have been caused by a large bronze terminal being extracted, breaking off the head, and a surviving fragment of the neck of a chiton could also belong to it (Figs. 319-320). V.5.2 Naiskoi (Fig. 254) Rowe's M. 207a-b, two free-standing colonnettes H. 0.95 m, found in the debris of his Tomb

E. 161 ‘Southern Chamber’ show partially fluted shafts, as if intended to be placed against a vertical face, and the existence of empolions indicates that they had engaged originally with a base and lintel stones (Fig. 321). Their possible function is demonstrated by an orthostat slab, Η. 1.12 W. 0.67 Th. 0.11 m, part of a naiskos, found in New Shahat which shows the height of a complete quarter-engaged colonnette in antis. An indication of the span is given by another incomplete orthostat slab and a complete pediment, H. 0.47 L. 1.71 W. 0.90 m, discovered in 1963 near Beschi's Tomb S. 80 bis (Fig. 150).” The proportions of the latter recall the shape of the sculptured panel on Tomb N. 17 and would also suggest the original position of Beschi's half-figure, although if this were installed it would leave only enough space for one other figure, not forming a triad (Fig, 157). The outstanding question with naiskoi is their location in connection with built structures, and the recently discovered naiskos orthostat H. 0.81 W. 0.75 Th. 0.12 m in situ on Tomb N. 1 bis 2 roof plinth proves without doubt that these can be situated on shrine tombs, although it would be too small to contain the 1926 half-figure which additionally shows well-cut drapery behind, perhaps indicating that it was free-standing on a marble base on another built structure nearby (Figs. 88, 95, 100). A fragmented naiskos tympanum like that found by Beschi was found in the foundations of Sacred House 24 in the Sanctuary of Demeter and Persephone, indicating a connection with the cult, although no connected statuary has been identified (info: Prof. Donald White) Because of its flat back, Rowe’s M. 1040, 1045 limestone female aniconic half-figure which ® Beschi (1972), 249-251 Fig. 79. © CSIR ΠῚ (1975),65 Pl 46 no. 119 Bonanome (1995), 109-110 Fig. 53. ® Thom (1993), 73 Fig. 8. % Beschi (1972), 164-168 Figs. 20-23. Since its discovery the protective lime concretion has begun to weather off the surface, exposing paintwork on the fourteen sculptured beams of the pediment soffit which were painted entirely in red ‘ochre, supporting a celing painted with sixteen black bands running crosswise, appearing as light grey 0.021 m wide on a red ochre background.

419

Beschi dated to 4th-5th cent. B.C. is suitable in size and proportion to be placed in a naiskos, leaving a difference in space suitable for some form of internal statue base to be included, represented in Tomb W. 152 as a casket (Figs. 253, 258, 390). Rowe's half-figure and naiskos may have been intended to stand on the sill of Rowe's Sarcophagus N. 81-UU, or on the cornice of an isodomic wall to a peribolos structure, for example the large isodomic-built burial precinct below El Mawy land (Figs. 246, 304). This is a possibility, as demonstrated by examples in the Rhamnous Necropolis in Attica where stelai and acdicula grave slabs sit on top (Fig. 285). V.5.3 Rock-cut sarcophagus statuary (Fig. 255) Aniconic busts and half-figures (Fig. 255). The size of surviving marble busts makes them suitable to be placed in sockets on the square lid plinths of rock-cut sarcophagi, as demonstrated in the vicinity of Tomb N. 370 by a cut socket (W. 0.41 D. 0.21m cut in by 0.03 m) which matches exactly the base outline of an aniconic bust in Cyrene Museum collections.” This particular lid also shows a pair of sockets for staples, a later addition to fix a stepped base for a stele (Fig. 258). The socket for this type of bust, dated by Beschi c. 480-460 B.C., is contemporary on numismatic evidence with Rowe's Sarcophagus N. 83-BJ which shows block stelai being used as an alternative (Figs. 187, 253, 257). Another bust in the collection shows small circular staple holes at its base,

indicating that these could equally be fixed to sarcophagus lids.”

Beschi’s realisation that Rowe’s M. 1040, 1045 aniconic female half-figure belonged to the lid

of his Sarcophagus N. 81-Q gave the first positive evidence that this type of funerary statuary was used in this context (Figs. 255, 390). The statue concerned would seem to be originally intended for a naiskos, which would account for its flat back, and because of its shape a broad socket had to be cut for stability on the central lid plinth. No statue bases were found for these, the plain sarcophagi plinths serving the same purpose, a point demonstrated by Rowe's M. 1029, 1332 aniconic half-figure from the vicinity of Enclosure N. 81-AN (Fig. 388). On the eastern slope of Wadi Haleg Shaloof by the ancient road in the vicinity of Tomb N. 54, a sarcophagus lid in a small enclosure shows a cut socket for a half-figure which in this case is not oversized or flat-

backed, but has sockets for staples at the sides which are probably unconnected, and may belong to another later stepped stele base. A unique, as yet unexplained feature on the lid of Sarcophagus N. 81-C may have some connection with the iconograpby of half-figures, although its profile is similar to Rowe's M. 819 (Figs. 262, 367).

conic half-figures (Fig. 255). The excavations in 1947 by Burton Brown in his Tombs C and F revealed female iconic half-figures and a statue base associated with Doric facade loculus tombs, resulting in their being placed on the statue plinth above the entablature (Figs. 39-41, 45). More is known regarding statue bases in association with their tombs than the statues that they supported. In several instances the bases remain in situ above the entablature in line with the entrance below, as in Doric chamber loculus Tomb N. 357 (Fig. 224). Overlooking Wadi Halag Stawat on Ionic facade loculus Tomb W. 115 they are again placed in line with the entrances. During clearance of Enclosure N. 83-BK numerous small fragments of a marble statue were found, probably belonging to a female half-figure which stood on a base above Rowe’s Tomb N. 83 entablature, and had been broken up for easier removal (Figs. 166, 172, 181) The most significant discovery of the word ‘@EA’ scratched on the polos of Rowe's M. 1185, ? Cyr. Mus. Inv. 228: H. 049 m. Polos Dia. 0.13 H. 0.045 m. Head H. 0.33 Dia, 0.12 m. Shoulders H. 0.105 m. Base WT. 0,38 D. 0.27 m; Bonacasa (2000), 210-211. ? Beschi (1972), 210 Fig. 61,1;H. 0.412 W. 0.345D. 0.225 m. Holes Dia. 0.01 D. 0.015m.

420 1333 small half-figure was made by chance by Dr Susan Walker (Fig. 411), recalling the use of the name at Eleusis where it is incised on a small votive plaque in conjunction with that of Demeter, both of whom are dining with Pluto himself.” Another, in fragments, which has a more structural nature because of its size, has the name cut by the head.“ The context in which they were

found was within the small walled enclosure containing a building known as the Plutonion, and the cave where Persephone in mythology entered the underworld.”

Rowe's small guardian figure with the hands concealed under a cloak is not represented by larger, more adult, iconic female half-figures, indicating that this served another entirely different purpose in the burial practices of Cyrene." It seems that this type represented a young girl who had reached a significant stage in her physical development for initiation into the cult in which Thea played an important function. The small sculptured head Rowe's M. 1153 could have belonged to

another half-figure which may have originated from the lid of Rowe’s Sarcophagus N. 81-AC,

where the burial assemblage contained among other things silver jewellery and a bronze strigil (Figs. 406, 412-418). The Thea figure would seem to have been face down when discovered, judg-

ing from the breaks, as these could only happen if it had been crushed in the terra rossa which had accumulated in Enclosure N. 81-KK, which is surrounded by large sarcophagi (Fig. 203). The

original position could have been on nearby Rowe’s Sarcophagus N. 81-AD, which has a sill along the lid, against a vertical cut face in the enclosure floor which would have protected it.”

V.6.1 Pillar stelai (Fig. 256)

Pillar stelai have two constructional elements, a large tapering shaft with empolion to receive a capping stone with decorative frieze and cornice. The inscribed shaft from Tomb S. 4 has a wreath cut in low relief with an astragal of bead and reel above, intended as part of the decoration for the missing capping stone." In Tomb N. 171 forecourt another large uninscribed pillar stele, including its decorated capping stone, was found in the fallen debris of the built facade." Recently another two plain shafts came from the development of New Shahat, presently stored at Casa Parisi, one showing a empolion underneath." The evidence of the empolion and the side cramp holes cut at the base of the Tomb S. 4 stele shaft demonstrate that these pillar stelai stood on a basestone, and were placed in a prominent position in the tomb forecourt, as Tomb N. 171 indicates (Fig. 231). The pillar stele capping stone from the latter has a frieze decoration of rosettes, a variation of those cut on an Ionic anta capital from the Propylon in the Hieron at Samothrace, built during the reign of Prolemy II (285-247 B.C.), which could be an indication of date.” Sculptured block stelai have a cornice of egg and dart without the frieze below, which in % Thorn (1994), 115; Reynolds, Thorn (2005) SLSAR forthcoming. Nat. Mus. Athens Inv. 1519: Φιλιος (1886), 19-32 Pl. 3-1; Barth (1909), 554-561 Taf. LXXXVIII; Κοτοιας (1937), 867 Fig. 2; Kerényi (1967), 151-152 Fig. 42; Bonanome (1995), 132-134 Fig. 67. % Eleusis Mus.Inv.5079: Duos (1886), 19-32 Pl 3-2; Heberdy (1898), 111-116 PL 4; Svoronos (1901), 487 ff; Kourou niotes (1933) Fig. 30; Mylonas (1961), 197 n.32, 198 Figs. 71,6-7; Kerényi (1967), 153-154 Fig. 44 7. Mylonas (1961), 146-148. 5 Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 158; Rowe Il, 20 Pl. 31b, Ὁ Beschi (1972), 220 Cat. no. 13 Fig. 63; (1996),437, "Masson (1974), 263-270 Figs. 12. Ant. Dept. Cyr, Ph. 2365;E. 897; Maiolett (1930) Tav. G, (1931a) Fig. 9; Beschi (1972), 168-170 Fig. 24 “= Tomb S. 4 H. 2.710, headW. 0.083 Th. 0.510, base W. 0.880 Th. 0.770m. ‘Tomb N. 171 H. 2.760, headW. 0.770 Th. 0.360, baseW. 0.900 Th. 0. 400 m. Casa ParisiF 2.500, headW. 0.690 Th. 0.400, baseW. 0.810 Th. 0.470m. 79 Samotbrace X (1990), 84-87, 143-145 Figs. 44, 62-63,65.

421

some cases is in one piece with the stele shaft, but it could also be a separate element; nothing is known of the form of the basestone. A well-known example (Cyr. Ant. Dept. A) has an unusual recessed panel portraying a horse’s head, emulating superior examples, as demonstrated by two stelai at Delos where the recess is an indent filled by a bronze panel."* Tumbled stele shafts which

have lost their capping stones were found in forecourt debris; an example in front of facade loculus Tomb N. 21 shows a wreath containing a ball of thread with a spindle and whorl (Fig. 220)

‘An upper fragment of a stele with two-line inscription was found in Rowe's Tomb M. 15 shaft;

this has an empolion on top, indicating the existence of the original capping stone (Figs. 96-97)

The only example seen in its context was in the forecourt of square chamber loculus Tomb N. 258, probably originating from the statue recess above the entrance and recently exposed by professional robbers, abandoned and left vulnerable to vandalism; this matches the indent on the cornice sill of Tomb N.183 Loc.3 above the entrance, in front of the isodomic screen (Figs. 220,

225). Cut in the coping stones of the large isodomic-built burial precinct below El Mawy land

are sockets which also match those used on Tomb N. 183, but the burial practice to which they relate is uncertain (Figs. 241, 246). Another slightly smaller stele indent is cut with a group above the entrance of Rowe’s Tomb N. 81 as socket D, where there is no screen present (Figs. 194, 297).

Small decorated capping stones suitable for these are stored at Casa Parisi, and in the museum collections a much plainer example (Cyr. Mus. Inv. 487) lacks a decorative frieze, which is

replaced by a two-line inscription:

Καλλιβαχος Ἡραλκλειέου

Callimachos (son) of Heracleitus

‘The size of the shaft for this piece matches the indent cut on Rowe’s Sarcophagus N. 81-P in

an enclosure (Fig. 297). Rowe's cornice moulding M. 1302 seems initially to be emulating the

decoration used on the cornice of the largest example from Tomb N. 171 (Fig. 256), and its size recalls the small square sockets noticed on shrine and temple tombs Rowe's M. 8 and N. 77 (Fig. 297). A possible reason for the scarcity of such small stelai is that they provided a ready and manageable source of material for Roman funeral busts (Figs 370, 402). V.6.2 Block stelai (Figs. 256-257)

‘Marble block stelai (Fig. 256) are the most common type to be found in the necropolis and show no sculpted decoration or recessed panels, The shaft can be completely plain, or cut with a two-line inscription about 0.20 m below the simple chamfered cornice, as shown by two unprovenanced examples (Cyr. Ant. Dept. B-C), the latter matching the sill indent on Ionic Tomb N. 108. ‘The smaller one from the Mudir's house matches the indent on Rowe's Sarcophagus N. 83-BH central plinth (Figs. 34, 57, 257). Cassels provided a context for the surface find of a large inscribed block stele in the ruins of temple Tomb E. 10, at the moment untraced.'® Two unprovenanced stelai with no cut inscriptions (Cyr. Ant. Dept. D, 1-2) match indents on Rowe’s Sarcophagus N. 81-Z and Rowe's Tomb N. 83-BF socket A respectively (Figs. 222, 297).

The central plinths on lids of rock- and block-cut sarcophagi show a wide range of stele sockets which Rowe recorded from his excavations, but none of the stelai that were found by him ** 1C, 22.25n. 7 Fig. 13; Vallois (1921), 242-246 Fig.1. "© Robinson (1913), 161-162 Fig. X no. 11; Reynolds, Thorn (20004) forthcoming. "% Cassels Arch. Phs. 261-262; Cassels (1955), 15,38 Fig. 6.

422

matched any of the sockets recorded (Fig. 297). I cannot recall other examples of block stelai in the Cyrenaica, but a far-flung variation of this type came from Sciatbi cemetery in Alexandria (Fig. 274). The Cyrene stelai seem to emulate Attic examples which have in some cases recessed panels, and were painted. The stele of Lysippos from Pagasai-Demetrias, Thessaly demonstrates that this type had, below the legend, a painted subject relating to the deceased in place of a recessed panel, and on another unprovenanced stele in the Louvre is a painted knotted taenia in red above the inscription, suggesting the original appearance of the plain Cyrene examples (Fig. 284) Limestone slab stelai (Fig. 257) are similar to marble examples, but are half the body thickness, and cut with a different cornice moulding of a quirked ovolo. The debris of Rowe's Lower Enclosure N. 81-B produced two examples, M. 1041, M. 1042+ of plain slab stelai (Fig. 391). On

Rowe’s Loculus Sarcophagus N. 81-UU at the side of the enclosure, the plinth shows the same size socket configuration needed for Rowe's M. 1041 slab stele and is the most likely origin for this piece (Figs. 257, 297, 391). No recognisable sockets are cut in the floor of the enclosure, and no suitable basestone was found for the other stele Rowe's M. 1042+, but an enchytrismos may be associated with it. Similar examples are Rowe’s M. [122 and M. 1125, discussed below (Figs. 202, 258, 392). The same socket configuration is cut on the lid plinths of Rowe's Sarcophagi N. 81: and N. 81-AI but no stelai were found (Figs. 297, 304, 426) Above Tomb N. 240, in the vicinity of Mudir's house, are two limestone slab stelai, in situ and half-buried by hillwash, each with a two-line legend: i Εὐκλείδας] Εὔφριος

Fucleidas (son) of Euphris

il Ije(o[u] Aáquoc

Peisis (son) of Damis

identical to those cut on marble stelai. These are most probably connected with the lids of rockcut sarcophagi which, if cleared, would establish without doubt the purpose of the sockets found on sarcophagi. V.6.,3 Stelai on sarcophagi (Fig. 257)

Block stelai on loculus sarcophagi (Fig. 257). Rowe's Sarcophagus N. 81-UU shows a large central plinth used for the primary block stele, with an additional sill cut into the slope of the lid, suitable for an orthostat-built naiskos, perhaps the primary position of Rowe's M. 1040, 1045 aniconic half-figure found nearby reused, the socket in the sill itself representing an alternative secondary use for this feature (Figs. 202, 254-255). The burial practice related to this can only be

studied on the example in Tomb N. 17 forecourt, probably cleared by Norton in his 1911 excavations (Figs. 34, 225). This shows no interior sill to support separator slabs, leaving ample space and height for a funeral bier or a coffin to be placed there, similar to the later Ptolemaic example from Abusir (Figs. 97, 274). Block stelai on sarcophagi lids (Fig. 257). On the central plinths of lids to rock-cut sarcophagi there is more tangible evidence of multi-burials being present, needing another stele to be included, or the replacement of the original one. Two examples in Rowe's necropolis excavations clearly demonstrate this sequence of events. In Rowe's Sarcophagus N. 83-BJ the square socket for the marble block stele was the primary arrangement, cut into later by two sockets for much thinner stelai, one needing to be placed at a tangent to the other in the secondary arrangement. This sarcophagus when opened contained the remains of five individuals whose names must have been included on the available stelai (Figs. 181, 187). On Rowe's Sarcophagus N. 81-HH the carlier square socket has virtually

423

been obliterated, and replaced by a more rectangular socket for a marble stele and a later included socket for a thin gravestone like Rowe’s M. 839 at one side (Figs. 297, 369).

Small tables against sarcophagi (Fig. 258). The table originally in front of Rowe's Sarcophagus N. 83-H was the smallest and most portable example to be found in his excavations, symmetrically placed in line with the featureless sarcophagus plinth (Figs. 295, 304). An even smaller example in the museum store H. 0.178 L. 0.381 W. 0.231 m (Cyr. Mus. Inv. 2024) has the appearance of a casket as shown on Tomb W. 152 naiskos (Fig. 253), but seems to have the function of a table, as the top surface overhangs on all four sides, and contains a well-cut circular receptacle Dia. 0.095 D. 0.024 m with a square slot W. 0.02 m at the back as if to accommodate a hinged disk-shaped lid, probably indicating Christian reuse for a religious purpose. Another small table stands in front of Rowe's Sarcophagus N. 81-Z, which has a large plinth socket suitable for a marble block stele (Figs. 256, 295, 297). The theory that tables are connected with block stelai is strengthened by Maioletti’s ‘ronolitico’ which has a central rock-cut dais. A larger table symmetrically placed in Lower Enclosure N. 81-B, in front of Rowe's Sarcophagus N. 81-1, again has a featureless plinth, while an identical example appears in the vicinity of Tomb N. 354, entered into below (Fig. 202).

Stepped stele bases on sarcophagi (Fig. 258). One of the two limestone stepped bases Rowe's M. 1123, 1124, found with stele M. 1122 tumbled in the debris of Rowe's Enclosure N. 83-23, was transcribed from his register as rom above a cinerary urn burial, which had been removed’, referring to a feature which in the publication he captioned as ‘libation hole’, but the lack of suitable rock-cut burial pits in the enclosure floor indicates that these had a different function (Fig. 192). A nearby dislodged sarcophagus lid, lying face down, may provide an alternative explanation, as the stepped bases could be placed on the central plinth with block stelai on top (Figs.

258, 402). This theory is further strengthened by comparing the sarcophagus in the vicinity of

Tomb N. 354, where the lid is entirely cut in the shape of a stepped base with central cut socket for a block stele, the space either side left for subsequent stelai or for statuary, which may represent a triad identical to that shown in the facade of Tomb N. 17 above the entrance (Fig, 254). V.7.1 Monuments - Gravestones (Figs. 258-259)

Stepped bases and stelai (Fig. 258). In Maioletti's publication is an illustration of a stepped pyramid sitting on what appears as a basestone, at present untraced. This belongs to a series of similar bases used for various purposes on built monuments and marble stelai. Stepped bases Rowe's M. 1123-1124 and N. 383 monument 10 were probably intended as bases for pedestal monuments like Tomb N. 87 or for topping sarcophagi plinths (Fig. 245). Cassels’ ficldnotes for Tomb N. 191 include a ‘pyramid’ showing an empolion on top which indicates the existence of another block; if this was so, then it is more likely to have the purpose of a stepped base like Maioletti D for a large marble pillar stele such as Cyr. Ant. Dept. A, which through its sheer weight did not require a socket (Fig. 256). On the terraced hillslope below ΕἸ Mawy land is a six-stepped limestone base in situ, sitting on what appears to be a basestone 0.52 x 0.44 m, against an isodomic wall. The terrace soil is too shallow to accommodate an inhumation, but the known dimensions of the basestone are too small to represent the top edge of a block-cut cremation casket, on the basis of Rowe's example N. 83:1 from his excavations (Fig. 304). This stepped base has a deeply-cut socket for a smaller slab stele 7" Stucchi (1988), 304-305 Fig, 97.

424

with identical one-third proportions to be inserted," an arrangement represented by a complete marble slab stele at Casa Parisi (Cyr. Ant. Dept. E) from an unknown archaeological context. This is initially identical in appearance to block stelai, but the body thickness is one-third and the cornice does not continue across the back, implying an entirely different arrangement against a vertical surface (Fig, 256). The combined evidence of these, when reconstructed, points to the possibility of a grave or cremation underneath. Pedestal stele monuments (Fig. 259). Pacho recorded a Ptolemaic obelisk in front of Tomb N.65, which must be a misinterpretation as no obelisks have been found in Cyrenaica to date.” With his introduction to Henry Salt in Alexandria, he would have seen the granite obelisk now in New York's Central Park in situ, sticking out of the seashore." It is more likely that Pacho may have seen a stele monument like those in situ by loculus tombs. Against the facade of Tomb N. 55 there is a pedestal and incomplete shaft, and a similar one in the forecourt of Tomb N. 228 (Figs. 224, 232). These resemble others built at a smaller scale on Rowe's Tomb M. 18 on triple-stepped bases, and on Tomb N. 17 sculptured panel (Figs. 55-56, 254). They also show what the missing upper part was probably like and, if this is the case, recall a similar example at Poros in the Argosaronic Gulf" The stepped stele base in front of Tomb N. 192 included a cavity which hosted a subsequent Roman burial, indicated by glass artifacts. The cavity itself recalls that inside the Pythagoras monument at Kerameikos (Figs. 46, 285). V.7.2 Memorials (Fig. 259)

Block-based stelai (Fig. 259). A facade loculus tomb cut into the flank of a steep valley in the vicinity of Tomb N. 362 has a later niche for a plain block stele cut above Loc. 7. This is reflected in niches cut in the plain facade of Tomb N. 53, which form the silhouettes of two block stelai with large basestones and shafts with cornice and blocking course above. These also seem to be later additions, possibly when the tomb's loculi were adapted at the rear, and would seem to predate Roman funeral bust niches, which are a hallmark of later adapted tombs (Fig. 296). In Wadi Halag Stawat above the entrances of Ionic Tombs W. 112-113 are representations of stelai in deep relief, with no space allowed for a blocking course. These are reminiscent of the stele cut in the same position on Tomb N. 17 sculptured panel, but without the supporters (Figs. 254, 259). Rowe's M. 1027 may belong to this type of monument, either as a basestone or as a blocking course. A larger comparative example (Cyr. Ant. Dept. F) of an inscribed limestone block stele without basestone clearly shows what was intended to fill the niches in Tomb N. 53. A separate basestone seems to have been intended, of a similar size to stepped base Maioletti E (Fig. 5). Inscribed memorials (Fig. 259). A marble cylindrical votive altar found in the necropolis, shows a wreath containing an inscription (Cyr. Ant. Dept. G), recalling those with a separate base block, found mainly connected with Rhodian or Attic burial practices.” A large plain-sided limestone block (Cyr.Mus.Inv.128) shows a recessed panel inscribed with a name within a swag with infulae, with a two-edged comb, a ball of wool and an empty spindle whorl, a subject matched by a marble stele from Tomb

N. 21 found in Norton’s

1911 excavations (Figs.

34, 256). Another

"= El Mawy land stepped base socket L. 0.33 W. 0.11 D. 0.06 m; Casa Parisi stele section Ant. Dept. E, 1. 0.43 W.0.15m. Δ Pacho (1827) Pl. XXXIL ? Bonaparte (1809) V Pls. 32-33; Budge (1926), 172-175 Pls. XIV-XV; Eggebrecht (1982), 20 Pl. on 18. ' Fraser (1977), 10 PL 23(a-b). Doc. Ant. ΠῚ (1933), 116 n. 113 Tav. XXXII Fig. 69; Fraser (1977), 25-33,

425

example (Cyr. Mus. Inv. 25) has a moulded plinth on three sides, and the pediment above indicates that it represents a false inscribed casket." Their bulky size suggests that they were placed on a basestone against a vertical surface, on a coping stone of a peribolos, or even on the plinth of a sarcophagus. Colonnette memorials

(Fig.

259).

In Rowe’s necropolis excavations

two colonnettes were

found in debris among rock-cut sarcophagus burials. Neither can be matched with plinth sockets, pointing to the need for a base block. The first, Rowe's M. 1026, has a empolion underneath and a cylindrical tenon at the top to engage with a mortice cut under a basin, which must be of impervious stone to retain liquid but not dry matter. The other, Rowe’s M. 1046, differs by showing a duct drilled though it as if for liquids to pass through to some form of base block which could itself be cylindrical, such as that found at the Demeter Sanctuary (Inv. 78-399). These have been combined here to demonstrate their compatibility when placed together in function, size and proportion. In the Sanctuary of Apollo is a marble fluted colonnette, placed on a statue base on a basestone, but the evidence for this relies on how it was found and how the colonnette is fixed, which could be equally misleading evidence, V.7.3 Gravestones (Figs. 260-261)

Archaic stele (Fig. 260). The upper part of an archaic limestone stele shaft found in the Northern Necropolis (Cyr. Mus. Inv.15,000) shows in light relief a naked ‘Doryphoros’ warrior and appears to emulate Attic marble examples, Richter's Type 1b dated 575-545 B.C. These are thought to have a basestone into which the stele would be embedded, with a cavetto capital surmounted by a seated sphinx." An example of a basestone and the lower part of a stele, thought to be late 7th to early 6th cent. B.C., was found erected over a mound at Kerameikos, suggesting a possible method of burial practice in Cyrene, which is now difficult to detect on the terrain. This is still the only indication that tumuli may have existed in the Archaic Necropolis, before appearing much later with roofed tumulus tombs (Fig. 250) Sculptured heroic slab gravestones (Fig. 260). Tall tapering Attic stelai in pentelic marble stand on basestones, their shafts sculptured with human figures in relief, and capped by pediments with acroteria. These are represented in Cyrene by a shaft fragment showing a hero with shield, found in the Agora near the Capitoleum (Cyr. Mus. Inv. 15,007)" resembling closely the pose of the warrior Chairedemos on an Attic grave-relief in Piraeus Museum, thought to date 420-410 B.C." A sculptured figure of a man wearing a himation from the Eastern Necropolis (Cyr. Ant. Dept. H) had been subsequently reused on the other side as a basestone on which to fix bronze statues, pointing to a scarcity of material (info. Dr Susan Kane). In contrast the 5rd century Roman stele of Antonianos the Fool of Ephesus found by Norton's 1911 excavations is the only indication of later burial practices on the terrain (Figs. 34, 36, 57). Sculptured aedicula slab gravestones (Fig. 260). The marble sculptured panel described by Beechey in 1822 as a ‘term’, seen near the Fountain of Apollo (Cyr. Mus. Inv. 15,019), seems suit" Doc. Ant. IL1 (1933), 116, 119 ns.111, 126 Tav. XXXIII Fig, 67, Tav. XXXV Fig. 81; Gualandi (1976), 209-210 151.7 Fig. 273. ἐν Chamoux (1953), 353-355 PL XXIL2; Paribeni (1959), 18 no. 18 Tav. 28; Richter (1988), 23, 15-26. 7" Kübler (1936), 185; Richter (1988), 14 Fig. 27. ?* Goodchild (1971), 92 Fig. 7; Bonacasa (2000), 198 "7 Paribeni (1959), 36:37 no. 51 Τανν 50,55; Clairmont (1993) 1,267 1.215.

426

able for placing in an aedicula funerary monument as reconstructed. Recently from Wadi el Aish in the Southern Necropolis a large marble Attic pediment was recovered in excellent condition, but without its related sculptured panel. This shows a small painted ovolo in blue with red darts and a lightly cut, rubricated inscription to Theuchrestos (son) of Philothales."* Both Beechey’s panel and the pediment are similar to Attic examples found in association with periboloi (Fig. 285). A limestone aedicula stele (Cyr. Mus.Inv.831) from the necropolis has indications of pigment over the surface, with the recessed area probably containing a painted subject of the deceased which has not survived. In appearance it recalls a Ptolemaic funerary shrine found at the Hadra Necropolis, Alexandria (Fig. 275). The latter may have been emulated by the inferior Roman example on Rowe's Tomb N. 2 anta, facing the ancient road (Fig. 296). The lack of funerary pedimented slab stelai in Cyrene’s necropolis poses a question which recent development of New Shahat has left unanswered. The Beida gravestone (Cyr. Mus. Inv. B.15; Fig. 260) in a granular calcareous limestone has a tenon for the mortice in the missing basestone, pilasters and a pediment, and shows an uninscribed arched recessed panel which has in the centre, cut in relief, a plain cinerary casket recalling in appearance earlier Rhodian examples, unknown at present in Cyrene's necropoleis.”® The Warrington gravestone of the same material, now in Edinburgh (N.MS. Inv. 1956374), shows a round-headed recessed panel, crudely inscribed as if obliterating an earlier painted subject. The capitals are identical to those cut on the gladiator stele from Tolmeita, which appear similar to the Nabatean capital used on Tomb 1 at Marina el Alamein (Figs. 267, 273)." Inscribed tablets (Fig. 261). A plain marble inscribed tablet was in situ by the entrance of the Tomb of the Veteran N. 173, lightly embedded against the quarried face of the Hellenistic tomb where the built isodomic facade was missing, and sitting on a reused decorated marble statue base for a half-figure (Fig. 235). A superior, well-cut square tablet 0.405 sq. with a 0.05 m

thickness is a representative piece claimed to be from Benghazi (Cyr. Mus. Inv. 265), commonly required in the burial practices connected with rock-cut tombs in Cyrene’s necropolis.» On some, such as Tomb $. 69, a horizontal gash is cut above the entrance, suitable for a narrow marble strip bearing the inscription to be inserted, and probably bedded in gypsum. Where square tablets have been embedded on rock-cut tomb facades only the niche testifies to their former existence, as shown above the entrance on Tomb N. 36 facade (Figs. 32, 221). The rectangular niches in Rowe's Tomb N. 9 portico were deeply cut on either side of the entrance for inserting thick tablets held in place by four cramps (Fig. 296). Only shattered fragments of tablets were found in Wadi Haleg Shaloof by Norton (Fig. 34), who also purchased pieces from the Arabs, and by Rowe in his excavations (Figs. 392, 426). ‘An alternative method avoiding the need for cutting a marble tablet is the use of a rock-cut surface for inscribed panels, a good example of which is the bilingual panel overlooking the ancient road between Tombs N.11-12, now much weathered and abraded by vehicles."* ?* Paribeni (1959),41 no. 62 Tav. 57; Fadel, Reynolds (1997), 36-38 Fig.2. % Doc. Ant. II-1 (1933), 115 Cyrene 101 Tav. XXXIII Fig. 65 9 Fraser (1977), 12-13 Fig, 25a. ™ "Thorn (1993), 69-70 Fig. 12. ? Doc. Ant. ΠῚ (1933), 118 Tav. XXXIVFig. 78 Cyr. 114. 7? Cyr. Mus. Inv. 265; SEG XVIII 772; S.E. Cir. 374 Fig. 171. ?* Pacho (1827), 374 Pl. XXXIII. © Robinson (1913), 1578. ** CIG 5175; Doc. Ant. ΠῚ, 268 Tav. CXIV Fig. 109 Cyr. 133 n. 546; SEG IX 247; this inscription when seen in May 2000 was heavily spattered with tar from road resurfacing.

427 LeVibio Lele Gattabo Le Numisius Lele Marlio] v. frater faciundum

For Lucius Vibius Gattabus, freedman of Lucius, his brother, Lucius Numisius Mar[io] freedman of Lucius, undertook the

Λεύκιος Od(Ptog Λευκίου /

Lucius Vibius Gattabus, freedman

vac. coeravit vac. 5.

vac. Γάτταβος vac. Λεύκιος Νουμίσιος v. Mágun A v. ἀδελφὸς ἐποίησίε]ν vac.

making (of the tomb).

of Lucius, (lies here); his brother, Lucius Numisius Mario, freedman of Lucius, made (the tomb).

Note: in L.5 / = freedman and in L.7 A = freedman of Lucius.

Dr Joyce Reynolds notes that since there was a governor of the province named Numisius {attested in SEG XLVI, 2207, which can be dated between A.D. 172-175) it has been suggested that these brothers were members of his household and so datable in the third-fourth quarter of the second century. In some respects the lettering, which is quite well aligned but not very well shaped, could accord with this, but other features could suggest an earlier date. Close by is another, smaller, plain panel suitable for containing a painted inscription (Fig. 61). Above the facade sill of Tomb N. 236 are three rock-cut panels of various shapes which Cassels thought were cut on an earlier tomb; this in principle is correct, but the morphology of the tomb displays no characteristics of being anything but Roman (Fig. 27, Tomb Ὁ). On the facade of Tomb W. 85 Cassels recorded an inscription which is probably Roman, although using Greek characters, within a rectangular panel, with an outlined gable at the top."* V.8.1 Cineraria (Figs. 261-262)

Vessel niches (Fig. 261). At the rear of some loculi are pairs of open vessel niches, as represented in Rowe's Tomb M. 16 Loc. 2, which is partly buried, and Rowe's Tomb N. 10 Loc. 3 (Fig. 64). The shape of the open niches in the latter, with their characteristic restricted bases, is a diagnostic feature belonging to a small range of vessels (Fig. 300). A black-glazed ribbed amphora found in Rowe’s Tomb M. 15 subterranean chamber reflects the niches’ size and shape (Figs. 86, 96), as also does a complete example of a more suitable size H. 0.687 m from Benghazi, indicating that its function was for cremation. An alternative shape is represented by Panathenaic amphorae, an example of which was recently found standing in the far corner of a loculus on separator slabs in a buried wide chamber loculus tomb at Wadi el Aish, New Shahat. This recalls a cremation in a Panathenaic amphora in Lemaire’s tomb at Euesperides (Fig. 269), which if compared with another of suitable size from Benghazi, H. 0.674 m, would also match the niches’ shape.” If one tried to insert these vessels into the niches, they would be found to be too shallow to contain them. However, if a block sarcophagus the size of that found in Rowe’s Tomb M. 5 were to be placed in the loculus it would occupy most of the area, as would a wooden coffin with the same dimensions, and the purpose of the shallow niches seems to be to provide a little extra space (Figs. 221, 227). This points to some of the larger burial artifacts being placed outside the coffin, which also explains the space left outside one end of the Cyrenaican Aslaia burial (Fig. 266). Luca Cherstich recently found a niche with an identical shape to those in Tomb N. 10 mentioned Smith and Porcher (1864), 117 nos. 30-32 Pl. 86; Cassels (1955),21 Pl. Xa-b. 79 Cassels Arch. Grey Book fol. 71. Ὁ» Brit. Mus. G. R. Inv. 1854, 2-27, 1, BMC Vases IV, 234 F.65; Way (1849), 136-137;Inv. 1856, 10-1, 1, BMC Vases 11,281 B.é09.

428

above, holding a central position at the rear of the burial chamber of Tomb S. 66, above a grave in the floor, which may indicate a different function. In Rowe's Tomb M. 3, Loc. 3 the shape of the open vessel niche represents the ubiquitous squat bronze hydria (Fig. 300), none of which have survived in Cyrenaica except examples in red figured ware, an example from Benghazi being used here in silhouette to demonstrate the shape. This niche was converted later to a Roman cinerarium (Fig. 300) by truncating the original Hellenistic niche, cutting a cremation receptacle in the bottom and inserting a cover slab over it. The void left above, which could have served the purpose of holding a marble funeral bust, and the small drilled holes around the edge, suggest the existence of a wooden panel (Figs. 116, 261). The feature of drilled holes is also found on Tomb S. 193 around an aniconic bust niche (Fig. 253), and cut on Tomb N. 410, placed around Roman funeral bust niches, is the outline of a wooden frame with dowel holes at the comers for fixing, on which a pair of doors could be hung.” External cremation and rock-cut tomb niches (Figs. 261-262). A later enclosed niche cut in the portico of archaic Tomb 5. 69 has a large square receptacle cut at the bottom, with a rebated sill in front, the latter obviously for holding a vertical slab, behind which was a cover slab over the receptacle. This recalls in construction a similar larger enclosed niche in Rowe's Tomb N. 401 which has the same features but without the receptacle, suggesting an alternative such as a cremation urn or casket (Figs. 101, 300). The open Hamilton niches also show small square receptacles as Tomb S. 69 and may have a similar function. An open niche occupies in Tomb W. 132 the common position at the end of the loculus but is entirely different, having an ogee-shaped cut at the top. Luca Cherstich found in Tomb S. 1 a large fragment, the first tangible evidence in Cyrene, of an undecorated marble Roman cremation urn, which would be suitable for this.”” In Tomb N. 181 three identical open niches in a row along the side of a loculus wall each have an identical circular flat-bottomed receptacle Dia. 0.23 D. 0.07 m cut in the sill. A barrel-vaulted niche in Tomb N. 224 has a similar but slightly deeper receptacle, recalling in shape those represented in Porcher Watercolour 97, called by Cervelli ‘deux petits bassins which may have this feature inside (Figs. 30, 233). Their function is unclear, but they could be for ἃ leaden canister to hold a cremation such as that found in situ in Selmani Tomb A at Berenike (Fig. 269). A more common type of cremation niche is that represented in Tomb N. 10 Loc. 2 which is round-headed and has a large receptacle in the sill, possibly with a cover slab (Fig. 300). An external example in the dromos of Tomb N. 258 is lined with opus signinum, indicating its Roman date. Casket niches (Fig. 261). An explanation of the function of these receptacles may be provided by the concentration of niches Hamilton saw in 1852 outside the city beside the road, which: “ὦ flanked on the left by a rock, artificially smoothed, and covered in a long row with niches square or oblong, and about one-third of their length in depth. Some have a square hole at the bottom, about three inches deep which, though sometimes in the centre, is more often on one side. Such niches I have met with in other places’, which could be a reference to what Norton found, referred to below, ‘but here they are more numerous, and in a continuous line for some distance, interrupted once or twice by the door of a sepulchre. Their object it is difficult to determine; they could not have contained urns, for they are too small, as wellas too exposed, being not more than three feet above ?? Cherstich (2002), 169 Τανν. 85-88. ® Bacchiell (1999), 191 upper photograph. ?*. Cherstich (2002), 147 Τανν. 63-64.

429

the level of the road. They might have been regarded as receptacles for exvotos, had they been placed at a greater height. This must refer to the niches bordering the eastern side of the ancient road to Balagrae, within a kilometre of the ancient city of Cyrene, because of the co-ordinate of ‘the marketplace’ given by Hamilton, probably meaning the Caesareum. Into a low rocky limestone outcrop by Tomb

S. 54 is cut a unique row of at least fifty-seven deep rectangular open niches H. 0.52 L. 0.92

D. 0.33 m, each showing a thin, partially eroded divider slightly off-centre. The left-hand portion

is plain and, judging from the space available L. 0.40 W. 0.33 H. 0.52 m, could accommodate a

casket like that in the Museum reserve collections (Fig. 252), while the right-hand portion con-

tains a square receptacle 0.12 sq., D. 0.08 m, above which is an inset suitable for a square cover

slab 0.18 sq. Th. 0.03 m. The receptacle is suitable to hold miniature vessels as used in votive deposits, and has a volume of 1152 cu.cms, which would suggest a dry weight capacity of 1 kilo, probably too small for a cremation. There are several aspects to consider: i. their location, which may mark the point of access to approach the Sanctuary of Demeter in Wadi bel Ghadir; ii. their noticeable uniformity, suggesting identical functions and a possible ritual purpose; i . the lack of any epigraphy or apparent funcrary practice connected with them. The proof of their purpose would be to find identical votive deposits within the Sanctuary, as the miniature vessels above are not known in their primary context, and the answers to these points should be revealed by similarities elsewhere in Cyrene, which immediately brings to mind Norton’s “Terracotta Shrine’ on the Acropolis, where a similar taller niche cut in a dressed outcrop shows an eroded central divider. "* An explanation for the niches is represented in the Cova Necropolis, Rhodes where a basestone to a small marble stele is inserted at one side with adequate space for a cinerary casket beside it. Cremation receptacle Against Sarcophagus N. 82-21 a square cover slab let into Enclosure N. 82-23 floor appears to be a rock-cut receptacle, its contents unknown (Figs. 193, 305). The purpose and size of the feature is suggested by two examples cut into the interior chamber loculus step of Said Faraj Tomb A, giving indications of its dimensions (Fig. 227), in this case Dia. 0.20 D. 0,30 m, with an inset rim suitable for a disk cover Dia. 0.28 Th. 0.06 m, which would have a 4 kilo capacity, suitable for a cremation urn. Another example in Tomb W. 80 has the disk cover wedged inside the receptacle mouth (Fig. 225). The cover may be an explanation for Rowe's M. 819, which if restored with a disk base could be of a suitable size to be placed in the inset rim of a receptacle (Fig. 367). Dokuz Sokak Necropolis, Rhodes shows larger square examples cut in the open, unassociated with sarcophagi. V.8.2 Ossuaries (Fig. 262)

Ossuary niches (Fig. 262). At the sides of the portico and around the burial chamber walls of Rowe’s archaic Tombs N. 2-4 are examples of rectangular niches, a later adaption which by their size and shape recall examples in Quarry XV at Tocra, connected with Semitic burial practices » Hamilton (1856), 72-73; these niches are now under threat from the development of the 2000 road, especially on the western side opposite those noticed by Hamilton, some of them inscribed on the sill edge, for example HMOE®IA. and .LAIOS letter H. 0.05 m, where the ancient road is only 9.21m running in a shallow cutting between the two rows of niches (Fig. 207). ?* Norton (1911), 156 PL. LXTV; Bacchi (1994),47 Fig. 4; Cherstich (2002), 82-85 Tavv. 26.28. ?* Fairman Arch. Rowe Phs. 145-146; Rowe II, 9 Fig. XIV Pl. 19c-.

430

(Figs. 268, 300). This immediately brings to light the lack of identified Jewish tombs or their inscriptions in Cyrene, which have been obscured by the morphology of the archaic chamber tombs that became their hosts (Fig. 76). The Jewish Revolt of A.D. 115-117 may be the reason for the lack of inscriptions or representations of the Menorah as these had been obliterated. Rowe was unable to find these as part of his original brief, and they were not easily recognisable in Cassels’ primary study of the necropolis tombs.” The sequence of development in tomb morphology is clearly demonstrated by Porcher Watercolour 90, which shows a loculus system, later adapted to include a sepulchre, an arrangement similar to that in Tomb

N. 24 (Figs. 34, 222). The sepulchre eventually became a host to

ossuary niches, which must still have contained their slabs in situ when the interior subsequently became a painted chamber to a later cubiculum with a barrel-vaulted arcosolium system behind (Fig. 237). The decoration used is similar to that in a triclinium recess in El Mawy land shown in Porcher Watercolour 120, and in Rowe’s Tomb N. 83 the arcosolium dado links them stylistically to ἃ common date (Figs. 235, 294)

V.8.3 Model burial furniture (Fig. 263)

Model funerary stelai (Fig. 263). Model funerary furniture seems to be symbolic representations of larger examples, as shown by Rowe’s model pedimented slab stele M. 1296, and another recut ἃς a block stele M. 1028, both recovered by him out of context in enclosure debris (Figs. 263, 387, 423). Their purpose is not immediately clear, but a plain pillar stele shaft found at El Fardia, showing a lightly scratched zoomorphic subject, the inscription below referring to a domesticated pet bitch, could explain their function (Cyr. Mus. Inv. 1621). The practice of producing small funerary furniture extends also to a model naiskos, which has lost its base, and could emulate the larger orthostat-built examples found associated with isodomic-built tombs in the necropolis (Fig. 254). Its precise function is a matter of speculation although, if it had a pedestal, it might be a representation of a funerary shrine, with enough space inside to accommodate a small terracotta figurine (Cyr. Mus. Inv. 652). This confirms the possibility that smaller built naiskoi were used for statuary (Fig. 254). V.8.4 Votives (Fig. 262)

Votive deposits (Fig. 262). The discovery against the case of Rowe's Sarcophagus N. 198A of two ‘Libation slabs’ X and Y, which had circular holes with cone-shaped stoppers, and the finding of miniature vessels below, showing no evidence of contact with a cremation (Fig. 324), gave the first glimpse of a votive funerary practice in a primary context (Fig. 117). Two similar examples, unprovenanced, were discovered during development in New Shahat recently, but their context and associated votive deposits are unrecorded, and the length of the stopper leaves no space for miniature vessels confined within the slab, pointing to the existence of a small pit underneath to house them. Luca Cherstich recorded at the rear of galleried loculus Tomb 8.1 an identical slab, ?* Rowe I, v; Thorn (1994), 106. » Cyr. Mus. Inv. 1621; Dobias-Lalou, Gwaider (1997), 28-29 Cat. 5 Pl. Ic.

431

which had originally been housed in ἃ niche over a shallow channel which led to an adjacent small circular cistern (Fig. 230)."* His discovery provides evidence that liquids were associated with these slabs, together with the miniature vessels. On this basis, there could have been a cistern connected with Slabs X and Y which was unrecorded. In Rowe's Enclosure N. 82-23 four small ducts were found in the enclosure floor, apparently relating to the adjoining sarcophagi, and by the fifth sarcophagus is a square cover over a cremation receptacle (Fig. 262). In this case the existence of miniature vessels and stoppers is unknown, and the purpose of the ducts is unclear as no other examples have been noticed at Cyrene (Figs. 192-195).

?* Cherstich (2002), 151-152 Τανν. 61-62.

432

LIST OF FIGURES CHAPTERV Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig.

259 240 241 242 243 244

Built Tomb Morphology

Rock-cut/orthostat-built double compartment temple tombs Type A.1.2 Iscdomic-built double compartment temple tombs Types B.1-2 and C Isodomic-built double compartment stepped mastabas Type D.1-4 Distribution of stepped mastabas Type D.1-2 Orthostat-built shrine tomb Type E; isodomic-built temple tombs Types F-G; isodomic-built loculus tombs Type H.1-2 Distribution of shrine tombs Type E

ig. 245 Composite isodomic-built mausoleum Type A; monuments and pedestals Types B-C 1 246 Built burial precincts Types D-E; burial plots Type F; defined areas Types G.1-5 and H

Fig. 247 Fig. 248 Fig. 249 Fig. 250 Fig 251 Fig. 252 Fig. 253 Fig. 254 Fig. 255 Fig. 256 Fig, 257 Fig. 258 Fig. 259 ig. 260 Fig. 261 Fig. 262

Figs. 239-263, way) wat) (a2) a2) W139) (3) (20 (224)

(2) Archaic orthostat-built burial plot tombs Types A-B (D Distribution of archaic orthostat-built tombs Types A-B 032) Orthostat-built burial plot tombs Types C-E (334) Crepidoma isodomic orthostat-built burial plot tomb Type E; roofed tumulus Type F (412) Block-cut marble and limestone sarcophagi; rock-cut sarcophagi Tomb N.145 Block- and rock-cut island sarcophagi; orthostat-builtsarcophagi; block-cut cremation caskets (V.4 3-5) ws.) Aniconic bust niches on rock-cut tombs in Wadi Halag Stawat and El Mawy land Iconic half-Bgure niche; sculptured facade panels; Rowe's aniconic halí-figure; orthostat(5.2) and isodomic-built naiskoi reconstructions Aniconic busts and aniconic/iconic half-figures showing the evidence connecting them with (53) broad sarcophagi (612) sockets matching and tombs portico built with Marble pillar/block stelai associated (623) Limestone slab stelai and matching sockets; uses of block stelai on sarcophagi (63, V1) Small tables against sarcophagi; uses of stepped bases and stepped lids (712) Pedestal teli, stepped stelai, block based stelai and inscribed or colonnette memorials 073) Sculptured heroic and aedicula slab gravestones Marble tablet and limestone panel inscriptions; Rowe's vessel niches; external votive (W73,N8.1) recesses and rock-cut tomb niches. Rock-cut niches, cremation receptacles; Roman rock-cut ossuary niches; Rowe's votive (V8.12,4) stoppered slabs

Fig. 263 Rowe's model slab stelai compared with model pillar stele and naiskos

(83)

433

Warercolour 19 Tombs AB

Rowe's Tomb M.2 “Tomb N 202

Mens. t del Jet D Fic. 239 -- Rock-cut/orthostat-built double compartment temple tombs Type A.1-2 (V.1.1) 1. Outline of false door.

434

Rowe's TombN.1bisI

Besch’s Tomb S.80bis

Rowe's Tomb. bis 1 Mens et del J etD

a Beach's Tomb E. 140

Μεβοϊειεῖς Tomb S. 185

‘Tomb, 186 Smith and Porcher Tomb K sm

2m

‘After Mailer

Fic. 240 — Isodomic-built double compartment temple tombs Types B.1-2 and C (V.1.1). 1. Temenos wall; 2. Conjectured entrance; 3. Subterranean loculi, upper level forming tomb compartments; 4. Paving slabs; 5. Burial precinct; 6. Subterranean corridor, 7. Ruined Doric structure; 8, Subterranean loculi; 9. Temple tomb.

435

Rowe's TombE. 161A Baril precinct Vicinity of Fomb N. 132

anh,

là

TonbS.21 lier Case? eldnores

1 Rowe's Tomb M. 5 "Tomb E19

"TonbE 160

Sie ofmonument

o

2m

0

T

Mens, Abdul Rhoem et del Jee D ‘Tomb N, 186

Fic. 241 -Isodomic-built double compartment stepped mastabas Type D.1-4 (V.1.2). 1. Destroyed by Tomb E. 161; 2. Block sarcophagus; 3. Possible site for tomb; 4. Approximate position of

unregistered cubiculum arcosolium tomb; 5. Approximate position of Tomb N. 131; 6. Approximate position of sarcophagus facaded tomb; 7. Stepped mastaba; 8. Temenos wall; 9. Temenos wall

436

Fic. 242 -- Distribution of stepped mastabas Type D.1-2 (V.12).

437

Rowe's Tomb ΜΙ 8 “Tomb N.37

Tomb N. 125-126 Tomb N.14

Tomb N.7

o

2m

0

3m

Messer del. Luca Cherstich

Fic. 243 -- Orthostat-built shrine tomb Type E; isodomic-built temple tombs Types F-G; isodomic-built loculus tombs Type H.1-2 (V.135). 1. Naiskos; 2. Casket; 3. Capping stones;4. Long chamber loculus system;5. Temenos wall; 6. Forecourt of tomb; 7. Possible tomb entrance.

438

Fic. 244 - Distribution of shrine tombs Type E (V.13).

439

Tomb N. 87

Rowe's Tomb Μ.17 "Tomb N. 385

ee Tomb N. 191 ‘Tomb N.245

5m

CUR SEATTLE. E] Mens. er del Jet D

Fic. 245 ~ Composite isodomic-built mausoleum Type A; monuments and pedestals Types B.C (V.2.). 1. Level sill extant; 2. Rock-cut grave; 3. Stepped base; 4. Doric entablature;5. Conjectured naiskos.

440

“Temple precinct Vicinity of N.570. Burial precinct Vicinity of Tomb N. 132 1

is

b.

qe ae

5

mel abD

Baron Bown Tomb F

Rowe's Tomb M.3 "Tomb N. 197

Tomb N.39

γ'

Tomb N39

Rowe's Tomb N. 85:BF

Mens. et ἀεὶ Jet Rowe's Tomb N. 34

Tomb 5.227.

Mens, edel Luca Chersich

Fic. 246 ~ Built burial precincts Types D-E; burial plots Type F; defined arcas Types G.1-5 and H (V.2.2.-4). 1. Rock-cut temple tomb; 2.Rock-cut sarcophagi; 3. Small sockets; 4. Earlier orthostat-built tomb; 5. Conjectured marble block stelai; Stele socket; 7. Revetment; 8. Screen;9. Block sarcophagus; 10. Stairs; 11. Limits of loculi;12. Stairs;13. Screen; 14. Built revetment.

aa

‘Tomb. 218/219

ieee Tomb E, 236 Type B Fic. 247 - Archaic orthostat-built burial plot tombs Types A-B (V.3.1).

Tomb 5.242 Afer Stucchi

442

Fic, 248 - Distribution of archaic orthostat-built tombs Types A-B (V.3.1).

443

Ir

1 sh ohh as Tomb N.253

[o

dt qe

ir p

=

d

Rowe's Tomb M. 14 "Tomb 8.7 Rowe Type ΠῚ PT Mens. et delJerD

4 eat T, ARsSmehi

Hamilton's Tomb conjectured A amo 5 ὑπο

Fic. 249 - Orthostat-built burial plot tombs Types C-E (V.3.2). 1. Intended block sarcophagus; 2. Block sarcophagus in situ; 3. Inserted isodomic-built cist grave; 4. Block sarcophagus.

444

Rowe's Type IL

Tomb E.47 conjetured Rowe's TombE. 161 Tomb E161

Fic. 250 - Crepidoma isodomic orthost (V.33-4). 1. Main burial chamber.

uil: burial plot tomb Type E; roofed tumulus Type F

445

EI

ΣΤ

(C-UF A) SPUN quio

rfedooses ano-po1 trfdooues auoısaun pue ojqrvur imo-porg - rez “DIE

‘at

446

LEM

E 5L; p Vics Nokams iens evSEAM S 1 NOSESlit AO

m

aR

L Museum casket

Vicinity of Tomb N. 216

Mens. et del, JetD

Fic. 252 - Block- and rock-cut island sarcophagi; orthostat-built sarcophagi; block-cut cremation caskets (V.43-5). 1. Slab stele; 2. Conjectured screen; 3. Staple holes; 4. Inscription.

447

Anicooic bust =

aniconic bust niche

“Tomb S193

TombW.132)

Lda

Combined busvtuberecongtucions

GyBeschiCat Mus 11136

Apollo Cy"Bese Mus. Cat11,1372 Sanemuny

‘Mens. et de.JetD

Fic. 253 ~ Aniconic bust niches on rock-cut tombsin Wadi Halag Stawat and El Mawy land (V.5.1). 1. Drilled holes; 2. Staple hole.

448

Tomb W. 22

——lJ ‘Mens. et del JerD

| Afer esci

Rowe's TombE. 161

Fic. 254 - Ieonie halffigure niche; sculptured facade panels; Rowe's aniconic half-figure; orthostatand isodomic-built naiskoi reconstructions (V.5.1-2). 1. Raised arm; 2. Head; 3. Shoulder; 4. Iconic half-figure; 5. Pedestal stele; 6. Herm; 7. Sculptured panel; 8. Pillar stele; 9. Conjectured monolithic superstructure; 10. Surviving orthostat fragment; 11. Pseudoisodomic exterior; 12. Monolithic superstructure; 13. M. 2074; 14. Isodomic-built structure; 15.M. 207b.

E

Rowe's Sarcophagus N. 81-UU Suggested location for niskos

ei

Vieiiy of Tomb N54

Marble anionic Gyr: Mus. Inv. 2201

pha

(ἢ

H Vicinity of TombN. 370

Rowe's EnclosureN, SLAN. Sarcophagus reconstruction

C

Fic. 255 — Aniconic busts and aniconic/iconic half figures showing the evidence connecting them with broad

sarcophagi (V.53). 1. Rowe's M. 1040, 1045; 2. Rowe's M. 1045 socket; 3. Existing limit of sill; 4. Suspected site of table; 5. Half-figure socket;6. Staple holes; 7. Aniconic hal figure; 8. Rowe's half figure M. 1029, 1332; 9. Rowe's halffigure M. 1185, 1333; 10. ΘΕΑ.

450

‘Tomb N.21 Robinson no. 1

Rowe's Tomb Tomb N.1 shaft

M

TombS.4

Rowe's Sarcophagus NM

contac 9

Cyr Ant, Dep. B

50cm

Mens. eid. J et D

Or Ane Dep D.2 ἘΣ

r

Rowe's Tomb

‘Sarcophagus

‘TombN. 108

L Fic. 256 - Mazble pillar/block stelai associated with built portico tombs and matching sockets (V.6.1-2).

451

mm

Tomb N.240

: mm

mm

Rowe's M. 1041

Rowe's M. 1122

Socket. SockerC Rowe's Loculus 2 Sarcophagus N.SI.UU

=

d 1

Ϊ

Bay re

Rowe's Sarcophagus N. 81-UU

ἢ

[255

NAT

Rowe's Sarcophagi

Tomb N. 17 ὅτ conjectured interior

=] Rowe's Sarcophagus Primary arangement

N.8:B]

Rowe's SarcophagusN. 8-8] Secondary arrangement

Rowe's Sarcophagus N. 8-H ‘Mens. ec del. Jet D

Fic. 257 - Limestone slab stelai and matching sockets; uses of block stelai on sarcophagi (1.6.23). 1. Funeral bier; 2. Marble block stele; 3. Socket for earlier block stele; 4. Later inserted slab stelai; 5. Later block stele; 6. Subsequent gravestone.

452

30cm

TE

Small able (Cyr. Mus. I. 2024)

Rowe's Enclosure N. 8223 sarcophagus reconstruction

Vini of Tomb N, 354 Conjectured sarcophagus iconography

=

ZB

amm

‘Tomb N.38 RowesM.IDS Rowe's M. 1124 monument 10 m °

50cm

‘Maio D Notes Conjectued reconstruction

‘Ment. del Jet

Fic. 258 — Small tables against sarcophagi; uses of stepped bases and stepped lids (V.63, V.7.1). 1. Small table;2. Receptacle; 3. Marble block stele; 4. Rowe'sM. 1122;5. Rowe'sM. 1123; 6. Hypothetical three-legged table; 7. Rock-cut dais; 8. Female iconic half-figure; 9. Block stele socket; 10. Draped hem; 11. Stepped sarcophagus lid; 12. Three-legged tablein situ; 13. Stele socket; 14. Cyr. Ant. Dept. E; 15. Base block; 16, Rock-cut grave.

453

τ

TOU

Rowe's Tomb M. 18.

° Composite reconstruction

-

|

Tomb W. 1120

omm

Vicinityof UE,

20cm —Rockcut grave Info: White

Mens. et del. Jet D

Fic. 259 -- Pedestal steai, stepped stelai, block-based stelai and inscribed or colonnette memorials (V.7.1-2). 1.5. Cir. n. 29;2. Cyr. Ant. Dept. F; 3. Maioletti E; 4. Stele niches; 5. Tenon for possible basin;6. Cyr. Ant. Dept. G Oliverio Cyr. 105; 7. Base block;8. Duct; 9. Colonnette; 10. Statue base. Note: not to scale.

454

Gye, Mas. Ine 15,000 Paibeni Cat 18 [Northern Necropolis Cyr Mus. Inv. 15,007 Ghismont Cat 1215 ‘Agora Oy Mus Ins. 15019 Baribeni Cat. 62

Beda NMS. 1956374 [Cyrene Southern Necropolis,

Fic. 260 - Sculptured heroic and aedicula slab gravestones (V7.3).

1. Painted subject; 2 Sculptured relief 3. Painted volo in blue with red dacs

455

unde

en

EN

angieNUS

ups usa

Orr Mus Inv. 265, 27 Tomb W.8 afer Cassels

τὸν ch omi R Irene e — acho insription CIG3175 SEGIX247

͵

RE Hyde Hellenistic configuration Rowe's Tomb N. 10 Loc.3

Tomb S.69

Conjecture wooden panel Roman configuration Rowe's TombM. 3 Loc 3 niche Tomb N.197

Hamkon’sniches Tomb 8.54

Tomb W.132 Mens εἰ del. JerD

Fic. 261 - Marble tablet and limestone panel inscriptions; Rowe's vessel niches; external votive recesses and rock-cut tomb niches (V.73,V.8.1) 1. Cover slab behind panel; 2. Cremation receptacle; 3. Square receptacle

456

TombN. 181

Rowe's Tomb N.2 ‘Ossuary niche a“

Rowe's Enclosure N. 8223, Note: che above not to scale. D

50cm

Rowe's Tomb Ν.

Slab ¥,M.2@ LER

°

ν jt

30cm Mens et del. Je.

Fic. 262 — Rock-cut niches; cremation receptacles; Roman rock-cut ossuary niches; Rowe's votive stoppered slabs (V.8.1-2,4) 1. Niches; 2. Receptacle; 3. Ossuary niche; 4. Ossuary niches; 5. Painted chamber; 6. Slab X; 7. Slab Y; 8. Assemblage XXIII; 9. Assemblage XXII

pr. Mus. Inv 1621 BR

(Gye. Mus. Inv. 652 Mens. et dl, Jet.

Fic. 263 - Rowe's model slab stelai compared with model pillar stele and naiskos (V.83).

VI.1.0 Cyrenaica and Marmarica (Fig. 264)

The primary colonists of Cyrene came from Thera, according to Herodotus, at the end of the Orientalizing Period 631 B. C.' and the Archaic Doric rock-cut portico type tombs with burial chambers, Rowe’s Tombs N. 5-7 of Phases 1-2, may have been cut around this time (Fig. 77). A better quality of road communication to Apollonia seems to bring with it Acolic tomb morphology, as demonstrated by Rowe's Tombs N. 2-4 in Phase 3 and elsewhere (Figs. 78, 208-209). This later wave of colonists seems to have reached westwards as far as Barce, to judge from its outlying cemeteries (Fig. 265). The Late Archaic Age seems to be ending with Ionic when Rowe’s Tomb N. 8 in Phase 6 was possibly cut, post-dating a group of tombs where the porticoes show a much

simpler facade (Figs. 210-212).

Internal unrest in Cyrene caused the ruler Arcesilaus ΠῚ (530-510 B. C. ) to flee north to the Aegean island of Samos (VI3.3), while his mother Pheritime fled further east to the island of Cyprus (VI3.1), and a comparable link with Cypriot tomb morphology is demonstrated by an example of a Doric subterranean open peristyle tomb in Cyrene (Figs. 217, 282). However, Herodotus

does not state that any settlers originated from there, nor that Samos played any role other than supplying an army for Arcesilaus. During this period of unrest the Persians invaded North Africa, besieging Barce and reaching Euhesperides in 515 B. C^ A radical change in tomb morphology happened soon after, with the introduction in Cyrene of developed loculus burial systems with Doric and later Ionic facades, without any Archaic examples other than the later addition of a theke, cut by Rowe's Tomb N. 5 (Figs. 75, 77). One would expect to discover an immediate link with the tomb morphology of Alexandria where, however, itis difficult even to find a primary prototype, other than a few adaptions in earlier rock-cut tombs (Figs. 233-234). John Cassels, who explored the Cyrene necropolis in 1953-54, offered no tangible evidence for the existence of Ptolemaic even in the later Baroque styled tombs, and even Rowe, who had ten years’ experience of ancient Alexandria, makes little comment. Only at Berenike founded in 246 B. C. does some of the tomb morphology have a common link with the earlier tombs in Alexandria founded in 331 B. C. (Figs. 269, 275). To demonstrate the existence of Ptolemaic burial practices in Cyrene Rowe used the Egyptian calcite alabastron M. 127 (Fig. 313), but he was unaware of the existence of the ithyphallic Min found in tomb clearance by Burton Brown, which points to the possibility of Ptolemaic burial rites being practised in Cyrene (Fig. 45). However, the tomb morphology where it was found does not compare with that in Alexandria, and the conclusion is that the Cyrenean tombs were reused as hosts for later Prolemaic burials and funerary practices (Figs. 45 Tomb F, 275-276). This is further borne out by aniconic and iconic statuary being completely unknown in Alexandria (Figs. 18, 95). ΙΝ. 155-158. ? KLIV. 162-167, 200.205.

462

Imported burial artifacts may give a guide to the origins of the resulting tomb morphology and burial practices in Cyrene. Rowe’s campaigns of excavation gave tangible evidence for examples of a Rhodian hunched bowl M. 691 and small knobbed amphorae M. 1078 (Figs. 357, 395), Attic black-glazed wares which can easily be matched to the Athenian Agora and further afield for Corinthian terracotta figurines M. 449, M. 1241, and small lekythoi M. 410, M. 1174 (Figs. 335,

338, 408, 417). The range of artifacts found in some burial assemblages in the Athenian Necropolis at Kerameikos, at present on display in the museum are, as expected, identical, confirming a stronger trade contact with Attica than with localized burial practices in Alexandria (Fig. 274). The importation of Pentelic marble stelai adds further evidence, not only of Cyrene’s prosperity, but of the possibility of Attic burial practices being present (Fig. 256). This is further consolidated by imported marble coffins which are only known in this part of North Africa (Fig. 251). It is not

surprising to find that Rowe’s Cyrenean forms are more compatible with material found in Rhodes, amply demonstrated in the Archaeological Museum Kamiros Rooms, rather than in Alexandria’s Graeco-Roman Museum. Magas as Ptolemaic governor of Cyrene after 305 B. C. should have instigated a dramatic change in tomb morphology, which is only found as adaptions in earlier tombs (Figs. 233-234). This is also apparent in some of Rowe’s tombs and sarcophagi which became hosts to later burials, based on numismatic evidence (Figs. 89, 327, 360, 366). Cyrene's apparent lack of the widely- distributed Hadra ware hydriai dated 271-209 B. C., diagnostic of Alexandria and used in cremation burials, is equally uncertain’? After the Battle of Actium in 31 B. C. Roman funeral bust niches started to appear around the entrances of loculus tombs as clearly demonstrated by Tomb N. 226 where there are at least twenty-six niches, the number of burials capable of being held inside the host loculi (Fig. 224), while in Rowe's Tomb M. 3 the earlier burials were still present, judging from the range of artifacts (Figs. 116, 309, 325-331). After the Jewish Revolt of A. D. 115-117 another change occurred

in tomb morphology in Cyrene with the introduction of the cubiculum and arcosolium system of burial, clearly demonstrated by Rowe’s Tombs M. 7 and N. 83 (Fig. 237). This type of morphology seems not to have spread very far outside Cyrene as Bacchielli clearly shows. The earthquake of A. D. 365 does not appear to have heralded the introduction of Byzantine burial practices into the Necropolis, and these may be centred instead around the churches. VILI Cyrenaica (Figs. 265-272)

In the West there is Messa to consider (Fig. 265), where there is an isolated archaic tumulus burial system.’ This points to a group of colonists different from those in Cyrene, with an alternative burial practice. The explanation is that it is a counterpart to the dromos burial chamber system under a tumulus, examples of which are represented in the arca of the Sardis necropolis in Lydia (Fig. 280). Close to Messa cemetery is a much later group of isodomic-built Ionic temple tombs recalling those once represented in Cyrene (Fig. 243).* The outlying cemeteries of Barce founded in 560 B. C. give scant evidence of tomb morphology. The provincial limestone aniconic female half-figure from Umm Azia is the first tangible example of this cult outside Cyrene; it has a similar shape to the niche cut on Beschi’s Tomb and is thought to date from late 6th to early 5th cent. B. C. (Figs. 253, 265). ? * ? ©

Brown (1957), 9-12 Pl. XXI Cat. 28-29; Cook (1972), 207-208. Bacchielli (1993a), 102-112 Figs. 28-37; (1995b), 164 PL. LXXIXb. Stucchi (1964), 127-128 Taw. LXIII-LXIV. Oliverio (1931), 273f Figs. 47-52 Pianta D; White (1993), 182 PI. 96. ? Tolmeita Mus. Inv. T. 77-960; Fabbricotti (1996), 120 Fig. 5; (2002), 49-50 Figs. 1:2.

463

The only archaic rock-cut Tomb ‘di Menecrate’ has similarities with Rowe’s Doric and Aeolic ‘Tombs N. 2-5 in Cyrene.’ Tombs belonging to the Barce Necropolis have eluded discovery, probably because of the terrain, which would only be suitable for subterranean tomb morphology and a variety of built tombs such as Cyrene Tomb S. 201 and monuments (Figs. 231, 265). The Aslaia tomb, an intact inhumation burial, in a coffin with burial artifacts with 24 ossified vertebrae, contained a metre below the present ground surface, gives the first glimpse of what they contained (Fig. 266). The structure is comparable in size to the main burial chamber in Rowe's Tomb E. 161, which is contained within a roofed tumulus (Figs. 135-136, 250). An alternative for the Aslaia tomb would be a simple tumulus similar to that at Choban Tepeh in Phrygia (Fig. 280), but the heavy plain lintel stones covering the main burial chambers of both tumulus tombs pose the question of why the lintel stones at Aslaia are pitched as if representing a roof, suggesting that the tomb was exposed (Figs. 266, 301). If this is the case, complete removal of the terra rossa would reveal something approaching an isodomic-built temple tomb identical to Tomb N. 77 in Rowe's excavations (Figs. 200, 243). The lack of a tumulus may perhaps be explained by a mudslide from the surrounding hills in antiquity, engulfing the necropolis.” ‘The more significant tombs of Tolmeita that have survived are initially those in the Western Necropolis (Fig. 267). The Mausoleum with its diverse suggested reconstructions raises a number of questions which are confused further by its consolidation as a ruin. The lack of stone debris in the interior gives me doubts as to the former existence of any substantial superstructure, as more readily available reusable building material fills the ruins of the city's western gate (Fig. 267). ‘The interior of the Mausoleum, which seems to have been reused as a gasr, may originally have had a barrel vault over the chamber and, judging from the corbelled construction used on Minutoli’s Tomb 1 at Mersa Matruh, had a similar form of superstructure recalling the appearance of Tomb N. 180 at Cyrene and that at Antiphellos (Figs. 245, 273, 279). Oliverio's Tomb, if not a cistern, would seem to be an inaccurate representation of a galleried chamber loculus tomb similar to Tomb N. 150 at Cyrene, pointing to some form of facade having existed (Fig. 229)." The Tomb of the Kartilioi fagade recalls similar examples in Cyrene where false ashlar is commonly represented in loculus systems (Figs. 28, 226, 228). The interior configuration recalls those quarried in the Kenissich rather than in the tombs at Alexandria (Figs. 10, 233). The dating of Roman inscriptions indicates that burials occurred after ca. 20 B. C. , but the tomb’s primary date could be earlier." Other inscriptions cut in the adjoining quarries imitate those more commonly seen in the Tocra quarries discussed below. The gladiator stele shows the type of capitals represented on another from Cyrene, both of which could be representations of a Nabatean capital, an example

of which was copied at Marina el Alamein (Figs. 260, 267, 273).

At Tocra the terrain is more suitable for subterranean tombs, but little is known of them other than the galleried loculus tomb sketched by Beechey (Fig. 268). The Semitic burial practices in Quarry XV sepulchres (Fig. 268), such as the ossuary niches in Tomb B, are an identical match with those noticed in some of Rowe's tombs (Figs. 262, 500). In Tomb C the low bench was in the process of being cut with graves as the heap of chippings testifies, recalling the graves cut in Archaic Tomb W. 18 klinai for example, which could be contemporary with those in Tocra (Fig, ? Pierini (1971), 24.27 Figs. 4-12. ? Vickers (1971), 74-80 Pls. XXVII-XXXIL " Stucchi (1988), 284-294 Figs. 70-82. ? Doc. Ant. 1-2 (1936), 245 Tav. XCII Fig. 73. ? Kracling (1962), 111-112 Fig. 38. ? Doc. Ant, IL2 (1936), 247 Ins. no. 493 Tav. XCV Fig. 79. κ΄ Barnett (1947), 105 Fig. 1; Wright (1963), 37-43 Figs. 5-6a.

464

212). The amphorae reused as ossuaries in the Tocra tombs recall examples in Cyrene Museum Reserve Collections, thought to have been found at Beida, which would form a suitable burial practice connected with reused archaic tombs in Cyrene (Figs. 208-212). The graves cut in the floor of Tomb D are characteristic of those cut in Rowe's Tomb M. 7 as formae, the latter probably Christian (Figs. 60, 299). The inscriptions commonly associated with the quarries emulate in appearance small ist cent. A. D. limestone grave slabs, such as those found at Tell el-Yahudiya in the western fringe of the Delta.” Rectangular-shaped sepulchres cut in the quarries at Hadrianopolis close to Euesperides show a tomb morphology of 2nd cent. A. D. , and are similar in plan to those in Tocra (Fig 268). It is expected that this type would be cut in the quarries at Tolmeita, but at present these are unrecorded except for their inscriptions.” In contrast, the quarries at Cyrene seem to lack this type, other than tombs used as cubicula with arcosolia, as Rowe's Tomb N. 82 demonstrates (Fig. 237). The Euesperides necropolis is represented by statements on unassociated burial artifacts in muscum collections, rather than tomb morphology and the related burial practices (Fig. 269). The French Consul Lemaire in Tripoli made some of the earliest discoveries at Benghazi by finding ‘plus de deux cens Tombeaux, qui sont taillez dans la roche'.” He found ‘des urnes de terre..., one of them a Panathenaic amphora showing the archon as Hegesias, datable to 324-323 B. C." ‘Cette urne étoit remplie de cendres de mort; avoit un Tombeau fait exprös pour la mettre, sur lequel il y avoit une pierre quarrée; & étoit couverte d'une platine de cuivre. Il y avoit à cöte de l'Urne deux lampes de terre d'un beau vernis comme de la Chine’... this ‘urn’occupied a tomb on its own... "toutes les autres urnes que j'ay trouvées, étoient dans les Tombeaux à cóté du cercueil οἱ il y avoit

des os de corps bumain: elles étoit remplie de cendre." Other Panathenaic amphorae, supposedly from the necropolis, range from 378 to 320 B. C. , and give a glimpse of the richness of the burials, ‘A ribbed amphora, found at Benghazi in 1838, bears graffiti of personal names on the shoulder: i, APICTAPXO ii. APICTQNOS, indicating that this also was used for cremation, resembling an example from Tomb N. 1 at Cyrene (Figs. 86, 299). Crowe's subterranean tomb of isodomic construction, found in 1860, gives tangible evidence of tomb morphology of a long chamber loculus system, immediately recalling Cyrene Tombs N. 165 and E. 180 (Figs. 229, 232); its primary Hellenistic inhumations were destroyed when it became the host to Roman burials, represented by stone sarcophagi and lead coffins.” The tomb morphology at Berenike entirely differs from what little is known of nearby Euesperides, by having subterranean sepulchres approached by a staircase from the surface. The interiors of Selmani Tomb A and Sidi Hussein Tomb A are identical to Chambrette B in the Hadra cemetery in Alexandria, all with loculi. A square-headed niche in Selmani Tomb A at Berenike contained an inscribed leaden cremation canister placed on a plain sill, with unguentaria in the comers (Fig. 269).” Mafluga Tomb IV and Sidi Hussein Tomb B recall Adriani Hypogeum No, 70, above which is additionally a built monument that may also have been a feature of these par? Louvre Inv. Ma. 4975 and Ma, 5027. Jones (1971), 62-64 Fig. 4 Pl. ΧΧΠΡ. ? Doc. Ant. IL2 (1936), 129-236 Ins. nos. 291-461 Taw. LXXVI-LXXXIII Figs. 35-50. ?* Lucas (1712), 126. ® Luni (1976), 264 Amphora 10. ? Lucas (1712), 126-127 PL. opp. 108. Way (1845), 136-137; BMC Vases II, 281 B. 609; Bailey (1972), 1-2; (1988), 87-88 Fig. 4; Small marble garland sarcophagus ca. A. D. 140 material originated from the Docimacum Quarry, CSIR I12 (1990), 46 Fig. 8 Pl. 23 no. 56 and same workshop found in Athens, Αλεζανδρη (1969), 70-71 Figs. 1,31 Pl. 54b; Michaud (1971), 827 Fig. 48, 5 Information John Lloyd.

465

ticular tombs (Fig. 275)? The Mafluga cemetery clearly shows the random nature of the placing of these tombs, with the lack of any formal arrangement (Fig. 270). It seems that the Berenike tomb morphology is not represented in such a concentration elsewhere in Cyrenaica, and its strong affinity with tombs of Alexandria points to a greater Ptolemaic influence in that region than occurred in Cyrene. Along the coast of Cyrenaica the burial practices point to a population change which did not extend as far inland as Cyrene, and would account for the lack of rock-cut inscriptions. As expected, on the eastern side of Cyrene the Museum Necropolis at Apollonia (Fig. 271) clearly shows the rock-cut graves having a common link with the morphology of those found by Rowe in his necropolis excavations (Fig. 166). However, the nearby modest subterranean loculus tomb under Tower III with a shaft in front points to tomb morphology applicable to the Cova Necropolis in Rhodes, raising the possibility that there would have been a stepped base with a screen above (Fig. 283).” A rock-cut grave is contained inside a plain marble sarcophagus under the ruins of what seems to be a built monument, probably similar to Cyrene Tomb N. 245 which has also a grave underneath (Fig. 245). The undisturbed inhumation burial contained an assemblage of twenty-seven artifacts consisting of red figured and black-glazed wares, and a Rhodian amphora associated with mostly local unglazed wares, lacking any personal items. As expected, a large proportion of these matched material Rowe found in Enclosure N. 83-BK sarcophagi (Fig. 181), and the inclusion of locally-produced ceramics in this new assemblage is in marked contrast to that of Aslaia tomb material where there are none (Fig, 266). At Mghernes settlement on the crest of a low hill isa fine example of an isodomic-built circular roofed tomb representing Rowe's Type VI. Its drum wall shows a series of funeral bust niches, and an entrance has been forced through it, revealing only the thick wall to a circular burial chamber. Nearby is a small orthostat-built shrine tomb identical to Tombs N.

125-126 (Figs. 243, 250,

271)? The Zawani Monument is a solid block with no internal cavity on a splayed base, recalling examples in Cyrene, Tombs N. 180, N. 245, the latter showing a rock-cut grave underneath (Figs. 245, 271).® The Gasr Jebr settlement has a group of block-cut sarcophagi which follow a wooden prototype clearly represented by that found at Aslaia (Figs. 266, 272).” These stand on stepped bases, either singly or in pairs, recalling the arrangement of Tomb N. 145 and the orthostat-built sarcophagi which emulate temple tombs (Figs. 251-252). The base of Sarcophagus A shows a single-level compartment for additional burials, the cut funeral bust niches on the sides of the case indicating that it was a host to Roman burials,? a practice which does not include the nearby much plainer Sarcophagus B, which itself recalls similar examples in Cyrene and at Messa, also unaffected.” The group of Ionic temple tombs at Ras el Hilal represent the best preserved examples, of which the ruins of Tombs E. 57 and E. 140 in Cyrene with their splayed bases are the same type, together with those from Messa (Figs. 240, 265, 272).

> Ghazal (1973), 221-230 Fig.2. % Ghislanzoni (1915), 12 Figs. 4-5. Ὁ Berges (19%), 98 Tav. 65,1.2. * Information Abdulkader el Muzeiny, Controller of Antiquities at Cyrene. ® Pacho (1827), 371-372 Pl. XXIV; Doc. Ant. ΠῚ (1933), 126-127 Fig. 97; Stucchi (1988), 317 Figs. 119-120 % Pacho (1827), 369-370Pl. XVIII, XIX. 3; Stucchi (1988), 259 Fig. 18. ® Pacho (1827), 371 Pl. XXII; Stucchi (1975), 77 Fig. 75; Uncini (1985), 87 PL 7. 1,12. ® Rosenbaum (1960), 15 Pls. 11-2. % Oliverio (1931), 279 Fig. 53-54, ® Pacho (1827), 369-370 Pls. XVI-XVII, XIX. 1-2; Cassels Arch. Misc. plans; Cassels (1955), 15 Pl. XIIIb; Stucchi (1975), 76 Figs. 62-67, 71-72a-c; Laronde (1987), 301 Fig. 100.

466 VLL2 Marmarica (Figs. 273-277)

At Mersa Matruh, Minutoli’s mausoleum Tomb 1 recalls in principle that at Antiphellos (Figs. 273, 282). Bates’ Tomb 1, which is a subterranean open peristyle type, matches a Cypriot &xample at Palaeokastro Necropolis and the existence of imports further substantiates this, pointing to a common burial practice ‘emulated later by Ptolemaic Alexandria (Figs. 273, 275-276). The settlement at Marina el Alamein, showing tomb morphology above ground, gives a different ic Ist cent. A. D. burial practices (Fig. 273). The built Tomb 1b containpost-Ptolemaive persofpect ing inhumation burials with their pottery has a column above with a Nabatean type capital on top, and recalls an identical burial practice represented by Tomb N. 186 in Cyrene (Fig. 241). In Tomb 2 the built stepped base over a grave reflects that described as a ‘cavity’ under Tomb N. 192 stele monument at Cyrene (Fig. 46). Closer to Alexandria the Plinthine Hypogeum No. 1 clearly shows small loculus sepulchres recalling those in Cyprus at Kuklia and Tomb N. 89 showing the burial practice in vogue, which would be suitable for coffins identical to those found at Abusir (Figs. 233, 274, 282)." The Archaic burial practices of the colonists of Naucratis, a city eventually abandoned after 331 B. C. , are unknown, but one suspects there would be initial similarities with Cyrene. Only the enigmatic, incomplete Ionic capital fragments from the Temple of ‘Apollo may be contemporary with Rowe's Tomb N. 8 capitals (Fig. 212). Alexandrian cemeteries show a wide range of burial practices biased more towards surviving subterranean tomb morphology than monuments above ground. In the Eastern Necropolis at Sciatbi cemetery, the pseudoisodomic work on a small limestone ‘altar’ recalls that cut on orthostat-built sarcophagus Tomb N. 124, the construction of the latter matching that of a raised sarcophagus in Paros (Fig. 252). The painted marble block stele Breccia Cat. 14 is a poor representation of Attic examples (Figs. 256, 274, 285).* Grave monuments like Breccia Cat. 36 have no counterparts in appearance at Cyrene, and even the stele to Isodora the Cyrenean is Alexandrian in style, as demonstrated by those from the nearby destroyed "Tomb of the Soldier’.” Also at Sciatbi is a cremation burial under a large pedestal monument and contained in a decorated Hadra ware hydria, which Rowe thought should be found under his Tomb M. 1 at Cyrene (Fig. 56)" At the Hadra cemetery (Fig. 275) the subterranean tomb morphology recalls similar, more developed arrangements in Cyrene (Figs. 224, 228-229), but has more affinities with tombs in Berenike and further afield in Karia and Cyprus (Figs. 269, 279, 282).” The pedestal monuments in comparison with Rowe’s Tomb M. 17, however, are half the body thickness and the stelai needed to be placed on the stepped bases are uncertain (Fig. 56). "The destroyed rock-cut Hadra shrine recalls in appearance an aedicula-shaped gravestone from Cyrene which stylistically seems to emulate it (Fig. 260). The only comparison that can be made with Rowe's Tomb M. 18 are two stepped bases, possibly for stelai (Fig. 55).” The spectacular Mustafa Pasha Kamel Ptolemaic subterranean hypogeum shows no positive connection in its architectural elements with the Doric tomb facades or tomb morphology of Cyrene, or with the carlier Cypriot examples in its arrangement, differing fundamentally by having an enclosed peri? Minutoli (1824),61, 64 Tab. IVa-b; White (1996), 68 Fig. ὁ. κι Watzinger (1905), 30-31 Abb. 49-53; Adrian (1934), 25 Tav, XIV; (1952), 148-152 Figs. 71-74 Boardman (1958), 203-204 7 Breccia (1912), 22 Tav. XXIX no. 33; Cassels (1955), 6-7 n. 20; Adriani (1952), 119-120 Fig. M; Fedak (1990), 179 Fig. 276 » "Brown (1957), 6-19 Pls. LVI; Cook (1997), 208. ® Breccia (1912), liv Fig. 17; Rowe I, 20-21 Fig. IX. » Gardner (1888), 265 Tomb B; Adriani (1952), 3-6 Figs. 9-10, 12. ® Adriani (1952),2 Fig. 8; (1956), 119-120 Fig, K; (1966), 118 Cat. N. 69 Tav. 40 Fig, 151,

467

style (Figs. 275-276). There is, however, an exterior similarity in the pilasters and entablature of the Spelia tomb facade in Macedonia, which when compared shows a different tomb morphology (Fig. 285)."" In the Western Necropolis, the Kóm-el-Shukafa catacomb complex, where Rowe excavated the adjoining Nemesis hall, has corridors of columbarium loculi around the main burial chamber, recalling by its appearance the modest arrangement represented by Tomb N. 365 in Cyrene (Figs. 234, 277). The triclinium in the complex recalls that inside Tomb N. 131, but again the morphology differs (Fig. 233). In other destroyed tombs in the area, Adriani's Hypogeum No. 128 has a similar system with a conch in an exedra above a painted frieze, recalling to some degree the arrangement in Rowe's Tomb N. 83 Arcosolium 12 murals, while the remains of Hypogeum No. 129 show a pair of niches crowned by a conch as if representing the arcading effect in both Rowe's Tombs M. 7 and N. 83 (Figs. 60, 144, 277). Wardian cemetery contained Adriani’s Hypogeum No. 102, one of the few examples of a small cubiculum tomb system to survive in Alexandria, now in the Graeco-Roman Museum, showing a conch above the entrance with three arcosolia inside.” The large marble garland sarcophagus from the nearby Gabbari cemetery which Rowe published matches that inside the Tomb of Grenna in Cyrene found by Pacho, indicating a common burial practice, but not a comparable tomb morphology, in Alexandria (Figs. 234, 277). The destroyed Thiersch Hypogeum 1 has a wooden coffin inside one of the loculi, pointing to a similar practice being used at Cyrene in Tomb N. 365, and highlighting the iron nails which Rowe claimed had belonged to coffins in loculus tombs he excavated (Figs. 326, 329). In Thiersch Hypogeum 2 isa pairof sepulchres similar to those in Cyrene represented by adapted loculus Tomb N. 89, and by Tomb N. 142 which includes a sarcophagus, recalling the similar burial practice used in the Plinthine hypogeum (Figs. 233, 274). In Anfoushy Hypogeum No. 1 is a cubiculum with inserted brick-built arcosolia inside an earlier columbarium loculus chamber, clearly demonstrating a transition in burial practices which was occurring in Cyrene in Tomb N. 365 complex, and more clearly in Tomb N. 226 which has been adapted for the purpose after being host to earlier Roman loculus burials (Figs. 234, 237-238, 277).

No Christian paintings have survived in Alexandria, and one needs to search further afield for equivalents to those in Cyrene. The subjects in Rowe’s Tomb M. 7 Arcosolium 7 recall another arcosolium painting in Tipasa in Algeria where the displaying peacock is surrounded by flower baskets, foliage and birds painted in red, green and white with borders in red.“ The representation of the Bon Pasteur with his sheep is painted over the entrance to a loculus in Syracuse and in an arcosolium in the Catacomb of Domitilla Cubiculum Q. 10 in Rome rather than on the sarcophagus case.” VI.2.0 Eastern Greeks (Figs. 278-281)

‘The lack of comparative tomb morphology in Ptolemaic and Roman Alexandria would appear to have had little impact on tomb development in Cyrene’s necropolis, and the immediate conclusion is that the latter's tomb morphology and burial practices had originated much earlier from colonists originating from various provinces around the Mediterranean basin. The evidence ^ ® © “ ©

Adriani (1936), 67-79 Figs. 29-30 Pls. XXV-XXXI; McKenzie (1990), 64-65; (1996), 11. Rowe (1942), 6; Adriani (1952), 181-184. Graeco-Roman Mus. Inv. G. 989; El Fakharani (1965), 57 n. 1, PL 16, Fig. 3; Adriani (1966), 155 Tav. 77, Fig. 253. Bouchenaki (1975), 33-40 Figs. 20, 124-126. Ahlqvist (1995), 244-245 Fig. 57a; Millburn (1988), 30-33 Fig. 16.

468

available in these ancient places is unsatisfactory as so many tombs have been destroyed, recording was inconsistent, and in most cases later alterations of the interiors were not realised. The comparative tombs can only present what has survived in these necropoleis out of context, as incomplete marginal evidence. Cyrene’s necropolis illuminates what has been lost elsewhere in tomb morphology, rather than what has survived as a neglected residue. Herodotus mentions subsequent waves of colonists in the Archaic Age as arriving from the Aegean islands (VI3.0) and the Peloponnese (VI.4.0) into Cyrene.'* VL2.1 Lycia (Fig. 279)

The tomb at Antiphellos in external appearance is similar to Minutoli's Tomb 1 at Mersa Matruh, and also reminiscent of the Mausoleum at Tolmeita (Figs. 267, 273). These point to an alternative construction for the latter which would be more suitable, and more compatible with that of Tomb N. 180 at Cyrene (Fig. 245)" V1.2.2 Karia (Fig. 279) The only Aeolic pilaster capitals were found at Aläzeytin in Karia from Buildings 30 and 31, which in the latter would seem to belong to door jambs recalling those in Cyprus. The plain aedicula tombs at Caunus also show high pitched rooflines. Tombs B. 5 and C. 1 correspond to Nacoleia tombs in Phrygia and an identical burial morphology (Fig. 280). In another part of the necropolis are Ionic tombs which are identical to those found in Lycia at Telmessos, and Tomb F. 8, one of the smallest at Caunus, reminds one of the size of Rowe’s Tomb N. 8 at Cyrene (Fig. 212).°

Theangela Tomb T has a long chamber with a gabled roof, which I suspect may be the origin for smaller gabled loculi such as at Kos, where the entrance slabs are cut with the representation of a coffin identical to that discovered at Aslaia in Cyrenaica (Fig. 266, 283). This implies that Theangela Tomb T could equally have housed a coffin, which is a possibility, as ruins at Keramos Necropolis B recall an isodomic-built gabled tomb containing a marble sarcophagus found in Samos, which in turn resembles the cenotaph of Battus in the Cyrene Agora." In Keramos Necropolis C is an isolated block sarcophagus, obviously emulating marble examples, but significant here by showing a plinth off-centre, recalling the lid of Rowe's Sarcophagus N. 83-BP (Fig. 305). Rock-cut tombs in Keramos Necropolis D recall those cut in Wadi bel Ghadir, Spanu Tomb 1 resembling in basic appearance Tomb W. 17, but differing by having a barrel-vaulted portico and burial chamber which shows a continuous low kline similar to that in Rowe's Tomb N. 4, a feature which should exist in Tomb W. 17 but is at present buried (Fig. 210). Near Yenije is a recessed plain facade loculus tomb which recalls the recessed appearance of a few tombs in Cyrene's Northern Necropolis, such as examples near the Kenissich and portrayed in Porcher Watercolour 118 (Figs. 28, 34). It has additionally a Hoplite shield in low relief above one of the “ἘΠ 161 © Texier, Pullan (1849), 146; Fedak (1990), 78-79 Fig. 92a-b. © Roos (1972), 21-22, 30-31 Pls. 5, 26, 33; Betancourt (1977), 50-57 Figs. 15-19, Pls. 29-34, © Roos (1972), 22-30 Pls. 7, 10-11. ® Bean (1957), 93 Fig. 8; Spanu (1997), 164-167 Fig, 78 Tav. 16. * Goodchild (1971), 96 Fig. 8 Abb. 37; Hitzl (1991), 30 Τὰν. 2. ® Spanu (1997), 164-165 Fig, 79 Tav. 17. > Spanu (1997), 169 Fig. 82 Tav. 18.

469 entrances™ reminiscent of examples on Rowe’s Tomb M. 16 and at Dokuz Sokak, Rhodes (Figs. 64, 283). A group of rock-cut tombs Holbach Grab A-C at Halicarnassus hewn in the scarp of the

hillside show arrangements similar to those in the Hadra cemetery in Alexandria and in Cypriot tombs, resembling more developed examples in Cyrene (Figs. 223, 275, 279, 282).

VIL2.3 Lydia (Fig. 280)

The destroyed tumuli at Sardis in Lydia seem to represent dromos systems with burial chambers, some of which may have contained free-standing klinai. The conch mural of Rowe’s Tomb N. 83 Arcosolium 12 indicates a Christian origin as it recalls the iconography used in the vaulted Peacock Tomb at Sardis, which includes a Chi-Rho within a wreath” The destroyed tumulus at Sarij-Ova, hastily recorded by Paton, seems to represent a dromos tomb and gives an insight into the construction of tombs where the burial chamber is built with what appear to be columbariumtype loculi, recalling those more commonly found for example in Thiersch Hypogeum 1 in Alexandria (Figs. 277, 280). VL24 Phrygia (Fig. 280)

The external appearance of the aedicula tomb at Nacoleia is strikingly similar in appearance to the Tomb of Abdul Rheem in Cyrene, both having the same steeply pitched tympanum supported on an epistyle, and in the latter a niche for an aniconic bust (Fig. 253), but the tomb morphology differs by showing a burial chamber which has been altered later (Fig. 218). The Doric tomb at Gherdek-Kaya has a pair of burial chambers, both originally surrounded by low klinai, but in one chamber now destroyed. The arrangement of tomb morphology recalls that used in Cyrene, mainly in Wadi bel Ghadir, demonstrated by Tombs W. 32 and W. 37 (Figs. 210, 217). The destroyed tumulus at Choban Tepeh covers an isodomic-built burial chamber which is smaller than that built at Aslaia but contained a much richer inhumation burial (Fig. 280).” ΨΙ.2.5 Paphlagonia (Fig. 281) Hirschfeld recorded at Iskilip distyle Tomb I cut in the rockface with the representation of a tympanum and a tristyle example at Hambar Kaya, both showing plump torus bases which correspond to others at Dasht-i Gohar near Persepolis. These tombs reflect the possible appearance originally intended for Rowe's Tomb N. 5, its central column standing in front of the burial chamber entrance, suggesting a primary common origin (Figs. 75, 77, 208).*

VL2.6 Cappadocia (Fig. 281)

On historic grounds the imposing Tomb D at Amaseia is tenuously thought to predate the mid 2nd cent. B. C." It shows a pedimented portico without the need for pilasters, a feature also of the later Tomb N. 365 at Cyrene which in contrast is out of keeping with other porticoed » » ® 7 ® »

Paton (1896), 261 Fig. 40. Choisy (1976), 78-79 Fig. 13 Pl. XIII; Perrot, Chipiez (1892), 269-274; Sardis (1922), 174, 181-183 Pls. IV.V. Paton (1900), 72 Fig. 12. Texier, Pullan (1849) PL LX; Haspels (1971) PL. 85. Perrot, Chipiez (1892), 196-205 Figs. 136-142; Boardman (2000), 62-63 Fig. 2.41. Perrot, Guillaume (1872), 201-220 Pls. XIX-XX; Gall (1967), 594 Fig. 10.

470

tombs (Fig. 223). The lost archaic pentastyle tomb at Dikili Tas demonstrates clearly a large forecourt with a cumbersome Doric facade with pediment placed on an epistyle, its columns recalling similar examples cut for Rowe’s Tomb N. 5, which has a small burial chamber (Fig. 208). VL3.0 Greek Islands (Figs. 282-284)

What tomb morphology exists on Thera today seems to have no bearing on the tomb morphology of Cyrene, which points to the influence originating from elsewhere. In Cyprus there are counterparts to burial practices in North Africa (VI3.1). The island of Rhodes with its trade links matches some of the tombs in Cyrene and possibly in Delphi (VI3.2). The Samos sarcophagus and its structural counterparts are relevant here to compare with Cyrene’s Archaic tombs (VI3.3). The one-time province of Crete has, as expected, some comparisons with the burial practices (VL3.4). VI.5.1 Cyprus (Fig. 282)

Acolic pilaster capitals forming part of the dromos tomb door surrounds to the square burial chambers at Samaria and Tamassos are in the same position as those in Karia mentioned above, differing from those in Cyrene which are free-standing (Fig. 208). The rock-cut subterranean peristyle tombs in the Paleokastro Necropolis come into sharp focus by the discovery of the Tomb of Thanatos in Cyrene, with the same slender Doric columns supporting an architrave probably for the built metope triglyph frieze and cornice (Fig. 217). The tomb morphology differs by Tomb 2 having burial chambers, and by Tomb 3 having a chamber with loculi which recalls Bates’s Tomb 1 in Marmarica (Fig. 273). At Nea Paphos a dromos tomb recalls the same layout of Tomb N. 90, but differs in the latter by being single-level as those of Chambrette B in Hadra Cemetery, Alexandria (Fig. 275). Amathus Tomb 151 is a dromos tomb like those, for example, at Sardis in Lydia (Fig. 280), but the interior shows later cut square sepulchres recalling those cut in principle in Porcher Watercolour 93 (Fig. 233). The dromos tomb at Kuklia shows clearly a morphology which is virtually unaltered, with sepulchres recalling those represented in Thiersch Hypogeum No. 2 in Alexandria and in adapted Tomb N. 89 in Cyrene (Figs. 233, 277). VL3.2 Rhodes (Fig. 283)

‘The city of Rhodes, founded by the unification of the island's ancient cities in 408 B. C. , may have resulted in various burial practices co-existing in the necropolis, a glimpse of which is given by the ‘Corinthian Tomb’ in the Cova cemetery, in principle a false-facaded Doric tomb with built entablature and possibly a screen above, judging by the defined area behind. A shaft is sunk in front of the facade, undemeath which are loculi for inhumation burials. Another tomb nearby shows again a shaft in front of loculi with a defined area above, contained within an isodomic-built screen with flanking walls. These forms of tomb morphology are similar to those © Sukenik (1933), 95-97 Abb. 6-7; Buchholz (1973), 326-330 Abb. 2a-b, 25-30. © Gardner (1888), 267 Fig. 2; Nea Paphos II, 197-200 Figs. 27-28, 73. © Gardner (1888), 266-267 Fig. 1.

an

found in Cyrenaica in the ‘Museum Necropolis'at Apollonia (Fig. 271), but mainly in Cyrene's necropolis where they are equally developed (Figs. 219-220, 232, 246). In another part of the necropolis at Dokuz Sokak cemetery is the ‘Tomb of the Shield’ which has a galleried chamber loculus system immediately behind the facade.® The subterranean tomb at Charmyleion in nearby Kos has an identical arrangement with the remaining doorslabs showing ἃ stylized sarcophagus end, recalling the Aslaia coffin (Fig. 266). In contrast, however, this plan is virtually non-existent in Alexandria, which was founded a hundred and twenty years after Rhodes (Figs. 274-277).

VL3.3 Samos (Fig. 284)

According to Herodotus, King Arcesilaus ΠῚ the Cruel (530-510 B.C.) escaped from Cyrene to Samos, returning later with an army. The mid 6th cent. B. C. Samos sarcophagus shows in low relief an Aeolic colonnade of pilasters with square bases, which compares with the voluted capital fragment from Didyma in nearby Karia thought to have been supported on a square timber post.” This evidence points to what seems to be constructed on Rowe's Tombs N. 2-4 and represented on Tomb W. 15 in Cyrene, rather than those mentioned above in Cyprus (Figs. 209, 288).

VL3.4 Crete (Fig. 284)

Acolic stone pillar capitals to porticoed structures have recently come to light at Didyma, as mentioned above, and Delos which shed some light on pillar construction, and point to the shafts being of wood, accounting for the representation of a basestone in the Cyrene examples (Figs 284, 288). An undisturbed Hellenistic example in the Kydonia Necropolis at Chania gives an insight into the burial practice. The tomb morphology differs by being a subterranean narrow galleried loculus tomb with four widely-spaced entrances compared with those in Cyrene, terraced into the hillside (Fig. 228).” The loculi are quattied as double level with a sill at the sides for the purpose of supporting separator slabs which were never installed, leaving the upper level unused, whereas the lower levels contained in total fourteen supine inhumations, some with burial artifacts ranging from olpai, jugs, cups, unguentaria, a single lamp, twenty-one figurines, gold and silver obols, disk mirrors, a gilded bronze and terracotta wreath, and included a Cyrenaican coin datable to 4th-3rd cent. B. C. which may point to the personal preference of the deceased.” Crete was eventually attached to the Roman province of Cyrenaica in 67 B. C. , becoming a kingdom in 36 B. C. An undisturbed Roman late Ist cent. A. D. chamber tomb found on Monasteriaki Kephala near Knossos demonstrates a change in burial practice, which can be used here as a filter to identify more clearly the later burials which have occurred in Rowe's Tomb M. 3 in Cyrene (Figs. 309, 328). The tomb’s blown glass is an important range of material associated with eight © Lauter (1988), 156 Abb. 1-2; Berges (1996), 99 Taf. 67,1. ^^ Ross (1850), 244-246 Taf. XXII Figs. 3-7; Schazmann (1934), 114 Abb. 2, 10, © H.IV. 162-164 ^* Samothrace IV-1, 65 Fig. 54; Freyer-Schauenburg (1974), 183-184 Taf. 76; Hitzl (1991), 30-32 Abb. 17-20. © Gruben (1996), 63 Abb. 3. Gruben (1996), 63-65 Abb. 3.4. © Μαρκουλακη (1982), 115-118,221 Figs. 8-10 Pls. 2b, 3a-b, 32a-b, no. 750. ® Maria Caccamo Caltabiano (1998), 110-111 Tav. IL. 4.

472

inhumation burials, the unguentaria being the same as Cyrene examples.” In a votive deposit at Kamilari was found a terracotta figurine head, identical to Rowe's M. 515, which is in the local Cyrenaican fabric, and may be either a copy or, more significantly, an importation from North Africa (Fig. 341-342).”

VI.4.0 Mainland Greece (Figs. 278, 285-286)

‘As one would expect there were strong trade links between Cyrene and Attica, clearly demonstrated by burial furniture (VL4.1). In Thessaly comparative tomb morphology is limited to a few examples (V1.4.2). The buried tomb facades of Macedonia have more comparison with Cyrene than Alexandria, where the Ptolemaic seems to have abandoned burial chambers in favour of loculus systems (1.4.3). Examples in the Pelopennese seem to have a wider range of earlier oculus tomb morphology, much needed to explain the arrival and development of Cyrene's loculus tomb systems (VL4.4). VIA.1 Attica (Fig. 285)

The Vourva monument with its solid stepped base is similar in appearance to Cyrene's

‘Tomb N. 382 rebuilt by Maioletti, but differs by the upper inscribed marble block supporting a statue instead of a stele (Figs. 52, 55, 285).” A marble votive capital in the Acropolis Museum

originally showed the volute and palmette motif painted on its plain surface, probably datable to

550-525 B. C. The motifs recall those used on the upper tomb facade at Qizqapan in Mesopota-

mia, suggesting that the capitals on Rowe’s Tombs N. 2-3 may have origins in the Eastern

Greeks. At Kerameikos cemetery is the mid 5th cent. B. C. stele monument of Pythagoras with a

cavity in its base, as suggested by Tomb N. 192 stele monument (Fig. 46). It contrasts forcibly

with those restored by Maioletti, which have solid bases with a pedestal stele on top (Figs. 55-56).

As expected the grave assemblages are similar to those found by Rowe; for example Grave 137 dated ca. 300-390 B. C. contained twelve small bronze rings, a small disk mirror, an iron nail and two miniature black-glazed lekanides. This material is identical to the rings found in Rowe's Sar-

cophagus N. 81-AC, with the mirror matching that from N. 81-R (Figs. 397, 412). Even model

skyphoid cups are common in the grave, and an offering deposit nearby in Building Z. 2 is thought to give a terminus ante quem 420 B. C. (Fig. 420).” Attic Pentelic marble block stelai are

identical to those found in Cyrene, and the material of the latter would confirm their origin (Fig.

256). An example shows a two-line inscription with a sunk relief below, carved later (Clairmont Cat. 1891). Another, more significant piece from the Acropolis hill represents a warrior described as: KY 1 PHNAIOX (Clairmont Cat. 1461). The Louvre stele shows a red ochre painted sash

across the inscription, clearly demonstrating the appearance of those from Cyrene (Clairmont Cat.

2253). Along the ancient road at Rhamnous are numerous marble isodomic-built burial plots or periboloi. Illustrated here are those of Hierokles and the good example to the brothers Atheno-

® Carington Smith (1982), 259-268, 275-278 Fig. 5 nos. 28, 39,47 Daux (1959), 794-796 Fig. 31. 7 Nat. Mus. Athens Inv. 81; Bichler (1913), 86, 97-98 Figs. 46, 55; Collignon (1911), 33-34 Figs. 13-14, Bortmann (1888), 176 Fig. 16; Kawerau (1907), 200 Abb. 5; Betancourt (1977), 103-104 Pls. 56-59; Boardman (2000), 67 Fig. 2. 47. Ὁ Knigge (1988), 92 Fig. 83.

473

doros and Dromokles, dated to second half 4th cent. B. C., displaying a projecting cornice with comer acroteria and grave slabs sitting on top.“ 4.2 Thessaly The Cyrenaic Treasury in the Apollo Sanctuary at Delphi, illustrated by Stucchi, must have been completed in the reigns of Philip II of Macedon and Alexander the Great by 322/321 B. C. The inscription on the western anta names the archon Megacles at its dedication between 330 and 326 B. C.” This is substantiated by the finding of Panathenaic amphorae, for example in Euesperides, with the same archon (Fig. 269). A marble door surround fragment shows the same series of mouldings as represented on the marble entrance of Tomb N. 21 in Cyrene, indicating that. they are contemporary (Fig. 220)" One would thus expect, particularly in the mountainous area around Delphi, a close link with Cyrene’s tomb morphology, only represented today by the rockcut ‘Door of Hades’ which shows sockets possibly for bronze fittings, and in appearance recalls doors built into false fagaded tombs in Cyrene and cut on the "Tomb of the Shield’ in Rhodes (Figs. 231, 283).

VI4.3 Macedonia (Fig. 285) The Spelia tomb shows a pair of shields on either side of the entrance similar to that on Rowe's Tomb M. 16 (Fig. 64), and has similarities in its facade to Hypogeum 1 of the Mustafa Pasha Kamel tomb in Alexandria (Figs. 275-276), but is pedimented and differs internally, having an antechamber and square burial chamber, both vaulted.” At Langada tumulus ten bronze bosses and a large quantity of nails were found, belonging to a wooden door, which strengthens the likelihood that the iron furniture in Rowe’s Tomb M. 5 represents a wooden door between the tomb's compartments (Fig. 314.” The tumulus at Kilkis has a much taller main burial chamber similar in arrangement to that at Choban Tepeh in Phrygia, and shows what should rise over the Aslaia Tomb, for which there is no evidence (Figs. 266, 280) Ὁ VI4.4 Pelopennese (Fig. 286) At Olympia an assemblage of fifteen flanged bronze shields with a diameter of 84-98cm was found on the southern bank of the stadium. Shield 4, which matches the diameter of that cut on Rowe's Tomb M. 16, demonstrates that the latter is a full-size example (Fig. 64). The entirely built tombs at Alipheira in Arkadia demonstrate a different type of tomb morphology with a built loculus system in a tumulus, with a dromus forecourt, recalling that also found in the destroyed

tumulus at Sarij-Ova in Lydia (Fig. 280). At Theisoa is a contrasting system, consisting of late

Hellenistic double-level built graves where the fixed separator slabs are set wide apart, presumablyto ® Petrakos (1991), 43 Figs. 2, 27, 29; Garland (1982), 165-16 . ? Stucchi (1975), 61-62 Figs. 49, 81; Delphi I Fig. 11 Pls. 69-76. ® Delivorrias (1987), 216-217 no. 114. Καραμητρου. Μεντεσιδη (1987), 23-28, 507 Figs. 13 Pls. 1, 3, 5. ® Macridy (1911), 198 Figs. 8, 202 Fig. 16a © Σαββοπουλου (1992), 425-427 Figs. 1-2 PL. 2.

474

allow for disposal of the remains of previous burialsin the lower charnel level. This unique arrangement is not apparent in Cyrene, as demonstrated by Rowe's Tomb M. 3, where some slabs are still present. However, given that separator slabs in Cyrene’s loculi are movable, this option would be possible (Fig. 116). In Corinth primitive representations of aniconic heads from a 4th cent. B. C. cemetery as debris are thought to represent grave markers, and if this is the case may account for the function of Rowe’s M. 426 found in an enclosure (Fig. 337). A marble Kline was found in a late 4th cent. grave, described as: ‘rectangular pit entered from above’. The burial practices of the Northern Cemetery are limited to inhumations buried in the ground in block-cut sarcophagi with thin tabular lids for the Classical Graves nos. 128-530 in formalised rows. Some of the few built tomb structures to survive at Sparta in Laconia are represented by a group of three small temple tombs, Dickins’ Tomb A being more complete with disturbed inhumation burials and their associated artifacts. The upper burial was supported on separator slabs, by an oversight missing in the contemporary 1908 illustration. Regardless ofthis, the tomb’s burial practice seems to be that intended for Tomb N. 52 in Cyrene (Fig. 243). Epidauros in Argolis has lost its necropolis to the Mediterranean Sea, and a small unprovenanced table found there, resembling those found by Rowe, gives only a hint of the related burial practices (Fig. 295)" VL5.0 Western Greeks (Figs. 278, 286)

Hellenistic tomb morphology in Southern Italy has some localized comparisons with those of Cyrene's necropolis (VL5.1). In Rome Christian catacombs are commonly combined with cubiculum and arcosolium burial systems, together with their related murals. The latters’ subject-matter is also represented in the catacombs in Syracuse in Sicily (VL5.2), but further afield in the Western Necropolis at Alexandria there are minor under-developed examples of this tomb morphology (Fig. 277) without any surviving Christian murals (1.1.2) VL5.1 Italia (Fig. 286)

‘At Canosa, built Doric Tomb 3 once had the remains of a built screen, thought to be pedimented. The facade, no longer extant, recalls a similar tomb rock-cut near Tomb W. 19 in Wadi bel Ghadir, unregistered by Cassels, which shows a central entrance with representations of double doors, one partly open, on either side between fluted Doric pilasters, probably as shown originally at Canosa. The terracotta sima revetments from the archaic temple of Apollo Alacus at Crimisa, in Southern Italy, show a frieze without the Doric metope triglyph other than a taenia in red and a band of black below to imitate the shadow, with mutules in red with five white guttae.“ This gives an indication that Cyrene's Ionic style may have been coloured on the entablatures, and would be represented clearly on Rowe’s Tombs M. 8 and 15, for example (Figs. 96, 107). Some of the marble tomb furniture from the Taranto Necropolis recalls the marble false sarcophagus in © Olympia V, 8,72 Abb. 8; Yalouris (1968), 189-191 Figs. 1.3. © Kurtz, Boardman (1971), 180, 244, 280 Fig, 52. ** Blinkenberg (1898), 5 Figs. 7-8; Wace and Dickins (1907), 158-159 Figs. 1,3 PL. VI. © Schütze (1857) Pl. 104; Fedak (1990), 113-115 Fig. 151 © Orsi (1933), 51-68, Figs. 39-41, Tavv. VI- VIII; Dinsmoor (1975), 84 Fig. 31; Mertens (1993), 125-126 Abb. 74b, Tav. 875

415

Cyrene, while a stele which shows a small table or casket supporting a representation of a hydria is reminiscent of a similar burial iconography showing aniconic busts instead (Figs. 253-254). VL5.2 Sicilia (Fig. 286)

The Acolic Selinunt pillar capital is similar to those in Lycia, but includes an abacus, a feature also included, for example, on Rowe's Tomb N. 4 capitals which have a more primitive appearance (Figs. 286, 288). A funerary cippus in Syracuse (Mus. Inv. 40,089) shows a representation of a mausoleum similar to that at Antiphellos, or alternatively Tomb N. 180 in Cyrene (Fig. 245, 279). Christian representations of the Bon Pasteur from Syracuse catacombs recall that in Rowe's Tomb M. 7 (Fig. 293). VI.6.0 Conclusion

Figurines and miniature hydriai found in the Sanctuary of Demeter and Persephone are also associated with burial practices, but aniconic busts can only be associated with niches on Archaic Tonic fagaded rock-cut tombs (Fig. 254). This contrasts sharply with iconic half-figures, none of ‘which were found in the Sanctuary, although the word BEA” occurs on sculptures found in the Plutonium connected with the principal sanctuary to the same divinities at Eleusis (Fig. 411). The diversity of the tomb morphology in Cyrene points to a cosmopolitan society with individual architectural styles and burial practices which are not entirely comparable with examples outside the radius of 25 kilometers, or a day's walk from the city. Alan Rowe’s campaigns produced a coherent range of primary artifacts relating mainly to inhumation burial systems in a limited variety of tomb types, and these artifacts and their assemblages are the only surviving material of 20th century excavations where a context can be found in Cyrene’s necropolis. They give a tangible record of Cyrenaican burial practices, which were only skimmed over by 19th century Victorian collections, and make it possible to identify the range of burial artifacts in the eastern Cyrenaica in contrast to Euesperides, for example, where John Lloyd’s burial assemblages clearly demonstrate the essential items to accompany a burial. Rowe's main flaw was the lack of a published description of the burials, particularly those in sarcophagi, and there was no skeletal study, unlike Burton Brown's detailed description of the burials in his Cyrene A and B, published over fifty years ago (Fig. 44). Work on skeletal remains, also the medical record and modern forensic tests would mean that today we might have some idea of the general health and appearance of a Cyrenaican in the ancient world.

© Lippolis (1987), 149 Taf. 18e-f ? Mertens (1993), 115-116 Tawv. 70,1 and 703.

476 LIST OF FIGURES

CHAPTER VI

Discussion

Figs. 264-286

North Africa Fig. 264. Cyrenaica and Marmarica : comparative tomb morphology

(L0)

Cyrenaica

Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig.

265 266 267 268 269 270 271. 272

Messa Cemetery and Barce’s outlying cemeteries; Umm Aia limestone aniconic half-igure Aslaia tomb, coffin and burial artifacts includinga slver-gilt wreath Tolmeita : Western Necropolis,the Mausoleum and rock-cut tombs; limestone stele Tocra : Eastern Quarry XV sepulchres; tombs in Tocra and Hadrianopolis Cemeteries Euesperides and Berenike Cemeteries; associated burial artifacts Berenike: Mafluga Cemetery Apollonia ‘Museum Necropolis’, Mghernes and Zawani Cemeteries Gasr Jebr and Rasel Hilal Cemeteries

(LLD (hia) (LLD (LLD (LL) (LL. (LL) (LL)

Marmarica

Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig.

273 274 275 276 277

Mersa Matruh and Marina el Alamein Cemeteries Plinthine and Abusir Cemeteries; Alexandria, Eastern Necropolis, Sciatby Cemetery Alexandria, Eastern Necropolis, Hadra Cemetery and Mustapha Pasha Kamel Alexandria, Mustapha Pasha Kamel; Western Necropolis, Kóm-el.Shukafa catacomb Alexandria, Western Necropolis, Köm-el-Shukafa catacomb, Gabbari and Anfoushy Cemeteries

(1.2) (1.1.2) (1.1.2) (E12) (E12)

Eastern Greeks

Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig.

278 279 280 281

The Mediterranean, contact through historic events and trade Lycia: Antiphellos tomb; Karia : portico, facade chamber and chamber loculus tombs Lydia tumulus dromos tombs; Phrygia: portico, facade chamber and tumulus tombs Paphlagonia : portico chamber tombs; Cappadocia : portico/aedicula porticoed tombs

(VL20) (V12.1:2) (123-4) (11256)

Greek Islands

Fig. 282 Cyprus : rock-cut subterranean peristyle or chamber tombs Fig. 283 Rhodes : rock-cut and built loculus tombs; rock-cut unporticoed chamber loculus tomb Fig. 284 Samos and other Aegean islands; Crete : rock-cut subterranean tombs and associated Cyrenaican coin

(13.1) (132) (1334)

Mainland Greece

Fig. 285 Attica: periboloi and stele monuments; Macedonia : door fittings associated with a tumulus burial. (V1.4.1,3) Fig. 286 Pelopennese : orthostat- and isodomic-built tombs; Italia: miscellaneous evidence (144; VES.)

477

Aer Rowe (1945)

Afer Bacchiel (1998) Fig. 1

Fic, 264 - Cyrenaica and Marmarica: Cyrenaica (VLI.1.) 1 Mesa 2 BarceUmm Azia 3. Tomb of Mnesarchi 4 Aslaia tomb 5 Tolmeita 6$ Tocra 7 Hadrianopolis 8 Eucsperides. 9. Berenike 10 Apollonia 11 Zawani 12. Mghernes Dj GasrJebr 14 Tas Hilal

comparative tomb (Fig. 482) (Fig. 483) (Fig. 483) (Figs. 484-485) (Figs. 487-488) (Fig. 489) (Fig. 490) Fig. 491) (Figs. 491-493) (Fig. 494) (Fig. 495) (Fig. 495) (Fig. 496) (Fig. 497)

morphology (VL.0). Marmarica (VI.1.2) 15 Mersa Matruh. (Fig. 498) 16 Marinacl Alamein (Fig. 499) 17 Plinthine (Fig. 500) 18 Abusir (Fig. 500) ia Eastern Necropolis 19. Sciatbi (Fig. 501) 20 Hadra (Fig. 502) 21 Mustafa Pasha Kamel (Figs. 503-504) Alexandria Western Necropolis 22 Kém-el-Shukafa (Figs. 505-506) 23 Gabbari (Figs. 506-507) 24. Anfoushy (Fig. 508) 25. Naukratis

418

Messa Temple Tomb

Mesa Tomolus.

Φ 2

‘Tolmeita Mus Inv. 77560 ° 30cm -

Tomb di Menecate

Afer Pier

Mens: et ἀεὶ, Jet.

Fic. 265 -- Messa Cemetery and Barce’s outlying cemeteries; Umm Avia limestone aniconic balf-igure (1.1.1). 1. Ustrinum; 2. Info: Fabricotti

479

Fic. 266 - Aslaia tomb, coffin and burial a

including a silver-gilt wreath (VLL).

480

‘Tomb of the Karo Abeer Wright

RZ.

Olive Tomb

Gladiator stele o

im

Fic. 267 - Tolmeita: Western Necropolis, the Mausoleum and rock-cut tombs; limestone stele (VLL.I). 1. Conjectured ground surface; 2. Limits of quarry face; 3. Slit loculi

481

Ossuary amphora

TombC

gms CE WI IOYANOYCE WR

Tocra gileied loculus tomb

After Beechey ΜΒ΄

Hadrianopolis small quarried sepulchres

Fic. 268-- Tocra: Eastern Quarry XV sepulchres; tombs in Tocra and Hadrianopolis Cemeteries (V1.1.1) 1. Vertical slab; 2. Niche III, 3.Niche IV; 4. Ossuary niches; 5. Limestone chippings; 6. Amphorae; 7. Chippings; 8. Marble sarcophagus; 9. Sepulchres,

482

‘Mafloga Tomb XV Sidi Hussein Tomb D

Fic. 269 - Euesperides and Berenike Cemeteries; associated burial artifacts {01.1.1}. 1. Pb coffins; 2. Mb sarcophagi; 3. Ls sarcophagi;4. Canister.

Alter Lloyd and Ghazal

Fic. 270-- Berenike: Mafluga Cemetery (VLL.1).

484

‘Mighernes shrine tomb

Mghernes roofed mulos tomb. Rowe Type IV After Secchi

Zissimonument

Fic. 271 - Apollonia ‘Museum Necropolis’, Mghernes and Zawani Cemeteries {01.1.1}. 1. Conjectured screen; 2. Shaft; 3. City wall; 4. Rock-cut graves; 5. Site of city wall.

485

m:

m

|

Block sarcophagus A

“ΖΞ, Block sarcophagus B.

LI -

Mens, et ἀεὶ, JD.

° °

‘Temple tomb A 5m 2m

A.

'

-

Temple Tomb B

Fic. 272 - Gass Jebr and Ras el Hilal Cemeteries (VI.1.1).

After Pacho/Seucchi (1975)

486

[^

Oi at H^

ἢ

Εἷς

ΗΠ

FI

||t

ETE ET ad u SE po

Minto Tomb 1

τῇ

1-1

—

0

v

aM

=

E Bates Tomb 1 Note: scale unknown

Fic. 273 - Mersa Matruh and Marina el Alamein Cemeteries (VL1.2).

1. Unquarried area; 2. Built loculi; 3. Grave.

am

Hol

—

‘ier Minh

487

Me

Gabled chamber loculi Plinthine Hypogeum No. 1

Breccia Cat 524 fier Brecc (1912) Scintbi Monument 2m

After Rowe

Fic. 274 -- Plinthine and Abusir Cemeteries; Alexandria, Eastern Necropolis, Sciatbi Cemetery (VI.1.2). 1. Courtyard facades; 2. Columbarium loculus sepulchre; 3. Open courtyard;4. Bronze wreath,

488

Chambreie A

Chambre C.

'

Hypogeum No. 70

Note: burial furniturenot to sale

Hypogeum pote No. 1

Hypogeum No.2

Fic. 275 — Alexandria, Eastern Necropolis, Hadra Cemetery and Mustapha Pasha Kamel (VI.1.2) 1. Kline chamber; 2. Open courtyard.

489

ano yy

490

‘Thiench Hypogeum No.2

Ar Breccia

Fic. 277 -- Alexandria, Western Necropolis, Köm-el-Shukafa catacomb, Gabbari and Anfoushy Cemeteries (V1). 1. Later cut hypogeum; 2. Later cut exedra; 3. Columbarium loculi; 4. Wooden coffin; 5. Columbarium loculus chamber; 6. Cubiculum;7. Inserted brick-built arcosolia; 8. Low dais; 9. Postaments; 10. Funerary shrine; 11. Sepulchre.

491

Fic. 278 — The Mediterranean, contact through historic events Lycia (VL2.1) Cappadocia (VI2.6) I Antiphellos ig, 510) 17 Amaseia (Fig. Karia (V122) 18 Dikili Tas (Fig. Telmessos Cyprus (VL3.1) Caunus (Fig. 511) 19. Nea Paphos (Fig. Keramos (Fig. 512) 20 Paleokastro Fig. Theangela ig. 511) 21 Amathus (Fig. Halicarnassus (Fig 512) 22 Kuklia (Fig.

Near Yenije (Fig. 512) Didyma (Fig. 523) Lydia (V123) 9 Sardis (Fig. 513) 10 SarjOwa ig. 513) 11 Ephesus Phrygia (VL2.4) 12. Nacoleia (Fig. 514) 1j Gherdek-Kaya (Fig. 514) 14 Choban Tepch (Fig. 515) Paphlagonia (71.2.5) 15 Iskilip (Fig. 516) 16 Hambar Kaya (Fig. 516)

Rhodes (VI3.2) 23. Cova, Dokuz Sokak 24 Kos Samos (V133) 25. Samos 26 Deos 27 Chios (Aslia. amphora) Crete (V3 4) 28 Knossos 29. Kydonia

and trade (VL 2.0). Attica (VL4.1) 30 Acropolis, 517) Kerameikos. 518) 31 Ramnous 520) Thessaly (V.42) 519) 32 Delphi 520) Macedonia (1.4.3) 520) 33. Langada

(Figs. 521-522) ig, 522) (Fig. 523) (Fig. 523) (Fig. 486)

ig. 524) (Fig. 524)

34. Spelia Pelopennese (VI 44) 35 Corinth 36 Olympia 37 Alipheira 38 Sparta 39 Epidauros 40 Theisoa Τωὶν (V5.1) 41 Crimisa 42 Taranto 43 Canosa Sicily (V5.3) 44. Syracuse 45° Selinus

(Fig. (Fig. (Fig. (Fig. (Fig.

525) 525) 526) 527) 527)

(Fig. (Fig. (Fig. (Fig. Fig. ig.

528) 528) 528) 528) 528) 528)

ig. 529) ig. 529) ig. 529)

492

3 Theangela Tomb T Alter Tesier Pollan

Holbach Grab A Halicamassus Necropolis

Holbach Grab B

re:

After Holbach

cr Necropolis Spas Tomb 1

Necropolis C Span Sarcophagus Keramos Necropolis

C

"

Fic. 279 - Lycia: Antiphellos tomb; Karia: portico, facade chamber and chamber loculus tombs (VL2.1.-2),

493

d | ! Sard Nepal

Tomb a Naka

‘Tumuli at SaijOva

°

Tomb at Gerdek Kaya 2m ὃ

Aer Paton

Meer Texer Pullin

Alter Perrot and Chipiez sm

Temelus at Choban Tepeh

After Calvert

Fic. 280-- Lydia: tumulus dromos tombs; Phrygia: portico, facade chamber and tumulus tombs (V1 2.3-4). 1. Burial chamber; 2. Main burial chamber.

494

Iskilip Tomb I

oQo dmin

$t:

3m

Hambac Ke " After Pero and Chip

Fic. 281 — Paphlagonia: portico chamber tombs; Cappadocia: portico/aedicula porticoed tombs (VL2.5-6)

495

Nea Paphos Tomb 2

Nes Paphos Tomb 3

Paleokastro Necropolis o

5 bis Alice Al Bey

m

fer

Nea Paphos Tomb Kuldia Tomb

Fic. 282 ~ Cyprus: rock-cut subterranean peristyle or chamber tombs (VI3.1). 1. Later cut sepulchres; 2. Earlier cut burial chamber.

After ΜᾺ James

496

After Berges (1998) Abb. 1 Cora Necropolis

‘Aer Lauer (1988) Abb. 1-2

Charmyleion, Kos

rb of be Si Doha Neo,

eon

las nd ons ick

Fic. 283 - Rhodes: rock-cut and built loculus tombs; rock-cut unporticoed chamber loculus tomb (VL3.1) 1. Conjectured screen; 2. Missing built Doric entablature; 3. Rock-cut architrave; 4. Alteration not included; 5. Shaft; 6. False door.

Didyma Capital

Samos sarcophagus

Section AB

Fic. 284 — Samos and other Aegean islands; Crete: rock-cut subterranean tombs and associated Cyrenaican coin (VI3344).

498

‘Vourva monument

GXS

Athenian Acropolis

p

Som

Kerameikos Cemetery ythagorss monument

(Clairmont Cac 1891

Louvre stele (Clairmont Cat. 2253

PeribolosN. 6 of Athenodoros snd Dromokles Rhamnous Necropolis

Afer Πετρακος (2976) E316.

Langada tumulus

Fic. 285 — Attica: periboloi and stele monuments; Macedonia: door fittings associated with a tumulus burial (14.13).

499

Alipheira Tomb

°

Sinon Capital 50cm

Terracotareveements Αροῖο Alueus, Crimisa

Ὁ

Xm

>

# Taranto Necropolis

Fic. 286 ~ Pelopennese: orthostat- and isodomic-built tombs; Italia: miscellaneous evidence (VI.4.4; VI5.1), 1. Red;2. Black; 3. White.

VILO.0 Introduction This chapter is a detailed corpus from Chapters II and III of the various architectural elements pertaining to rock-cut and built tombs together with their murals (VII.1.0-VII.4.0), burial furniture and subsequent alterations in the Roman period (VIL5.0-VIL.11.0). Also described are inhumation and cremation burial practices (VII.12.0-VII.18.0). ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS VIL1.0 Columns and Pillars

Rock-cut Archaic portico chamber tombs fall into three main categories, identified mainly by the form of their columns and pillars cut from the rock face. Their intercolumniation and height proportions are given for Doric (VIL.1.1), Acolic (VII.1.2) and Ionic (VII.1.3). VILI.1 Archaic Doric Columns (Fig. 287)

i Ν. 5 Column 1 plain rudimentary shaft, capital and abacus, column later altered by removal of portico floor to increase height by 0.65m (Figs. 75, 80). Total H. 2.09m. Shaft H. 1.66 Dia. 0.86, 0.60 Echinus H. 0.27 Dia. 0,88 Abacus H. 0.16, 0.90 sq. Capital centerings 1.37; 1.37 Intercolumniation 0.50; 0.54 (0.80); 0.64m. ib N.6 Column 1, similar to iii fifteen flutes, astragal unknown, capital larger than ii (Fig. 75). Total H. 1.57m. Shaft H. 1.30 Dia. 0.56, 0.48 Echinus H. 0.12 Dia. 0.62m. Abacus H. 0.15, 0.78 sq. Capital centerings 1.26 Intercolumniation 0. ~ ; 0.65; 0.62; 0. — m. iii N. 7 Column 2, commences with cut plinth, cylindrical shaft with eighteen flat flutes, tapers towards as tragal with triple annulets, above which are echinus and high abacus (Fig. 75). Total H. 1.59m. Shaft H. 1.30 Dia. 0.52, 0.40 Annulets H. 0.05 Echinus H. 0.15 Dia. 0.65m. Abacus H. 0.13,0.73 sq. Capital centerings 1.24 Intercolumniation 0.-; 0.68; 0.72; 0. m. iv N. 9 Column 3 cylindrical shaft tapers towards partly finished capital, fully in the round on western side, On eastern side echinus and abacus are linked to unfinished capitals of Columns 1 and 2 by continuous squared course of stone only partly cut away (Fig. 74) Total H. 1.75m. Shaft H. 1.50 Dia. 0.60, 0.40 Echinus H. 0.12 Dia. 0.66m, Abacus H. 0.13, 0.75 sq. Capital centerings approx.1.15 Intercolumniation 0.57; 0.55; 0.50; 0.48m. ? Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 76; Rowe Il, 6 * Cassels (1955), 17 PL. ΧΙς,

PL17a; DAI neg.no. 69.1645.

504 VIL1.2 Aeolic Pillars (Fig.288)

1 N.2 Pillar 1 as ii, commences with plinth, squared astragal, capital undecorated (Fig. 76). Total H. 2.00m. Shaft Ἡ. 64 W. 0.58, 0.42 Th. 0.52, 037m. Astragal H. 0.04 Volute H. 0.24 Span 0.68 Abacus H. 0.04 W. 0.69 Th. 0.37 Capital centerings 1.32; 1.63 Intercolumniation 0.88; 0.74; 1.06; ii

079m. N.3 Pillar 3 as i undecorated (Fig. 76).

Total H. 2.06m. Shaft H. 1.63 W. 0.61, 0.42 Th. 051, 0.40m. Astragal H. 0.06 Volute H. 0.31 Span 073 ‘Abacus H. 0.06 W. 0.67 Th. 0.40 Capital centerings 1.47 Intercolumniation 0.89; 0.90; 0.89; 0.85m. iii N.4 Pillar 3 complete. Vertical front, rectangular section, but sides taper towards rounded astragal, ‘where fluted volutes terminate, their tops meeting abacus and continuing on to cone-shaped eye. Above and between is a trio of lancer-shaped leaves, central one cutting through abacus (Fig. 76). Pillar 1 similar decoration,‘ also on a Kline in tomb chamber (Fig. 295). Total H. 234m. Shaft H. 1.74 W. 0.59, 047 Th. 053, 041m. Astragal H. 0.07 Volute H. 0.33 Span 0.76 Abacus 1.00m.

H. 0.06 W.

0.77 Th.

0.42

Capital centerings

1.52; 1.52 Intercolumniation

0.82; 0.94; 0.94;

VIL1.3 Archaic Ionic Columns (Fig. 288)

i N.8 Column 1 cylindrical shaft with sixteen lightly cut flutes, distinctive double row of egg and dart decoration on echinus. Plain deep cushion with pulvinus showing three baguettes, bead and reel on abacus (Fig. 74)? Total H. 1.97m. Shaft H. 1.66 Dia, 0.41, 0.32 Astragal, echinus and cushion H. 031 Span 0.68 Pulvinus Th. 0.35 Abacus H. 0.04 W.0.62 Th. 0.42 Capital centerings 1.26 Intercolumniation 0.77; 0.83; 0.83m. Antae: eastern example more complete W. 0.47m, shows rounded vertical inner facing corner W. 0.06 with remains of wavy pattern. Capital shows series of flutes above which is an astragal with bead moulding and a taenia.

VIL2.0 Entablatures Rock-cut Archaic portico chamber tombs are of the same categories as before (VII.1.0) and show a plain epistyle (VIL2.1-2). Evidence for a pediment above is a matter for discussion (IV.1.1). Archaic Ionic Tomb N. 8 has a sculpted decorated entablature and pediment (VIL2.3), while the Classical fagade loculus tombs show built Doric entablatures decorated with colour, with orthostat or isodomic built screens above (VIL 2.4). VIL2.1 Archaic Doric Epistyles i N.5 Well-dressed surface with extremely irregular top and later cut gully above Column 2. Weathered remains of apparent round-headed niche berween anta and Column 1, and a rectangular niche in the epistyle above Column 3 (Figs. 75, 296). Total H. 0.52m. ii N. 6 Roughly cut surface, irregular top, projecting in front of column abaci. At eastern end it is 045m in ? Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 75; Rowe II,6 PL. 178. © Cassels (1955), 17 Pl. XId; DAI neg. no .69.1644 . > Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 77; Rowe II, 6 Pl. 16c; Cassels (1955), 18 PL. XIb; DAI neg. no. 69.1646.

505

front of epistyle of Tomb N.5 and at western end it is 0.20m in front of epistyle of Tomb N.7, the latter indicating its intended alignment (Fig. 75). Total H. 0.65m. iii N. 7 Well-dressed surface, top regular in eastern part with later cut gully in epistyle above Column 3 Set back by 0.25m from later Tomb N. 8 tympanum (Fig. 75). Total H. 0.72m. iv N. 9 Extremely high epistyle, well-dressed surface, probably intended as n attic frieze. On top at western end is a cut sil, at a similar level to that of Tomb N. 10; facade projects by 0.20m in front of Tomb N. 8 (Figs. 74, 79). Total H. 1.70m. VIL.2.2 Aeolic Epistyles (Fig. 289)

i N.2 Well-dressed epistyle with irregular top, increasing in height at western end. Row of fifteen weathcred, regularly-spaced holes 0.26m apart and 033m above capitals, possibly representing intended quarrying of sill at limit of epistyle (Figs. 76, 78). Total H. 0.66-0.98m. ü N. 3 Well-dressed epistyle with uneven chamfered offset 0.29m above capitals representing its limits, which projects 0.04m and meets natural rock surface above (Fig. 76). Total H. 0.55-0.75m. ii N. 4 Completely dressed epistyle with top showing a horizontal cut sill running the length of facade, interrupted by alater cut gully above Pillar 2 (Fig. 76). Total H. 0.82m, VIL2.5 Archaic Ionic Entablature (Fig. 289)

1 N. 8 Architrave without friez, cornice shows astragal of bead and reel, lesbian cyma of tongue and dart; tympanum shows raking cornice in the same order without astragal of bead and reel; additionally crowned with fillet and fluted cyma. The pediment ridge shows acroterion base decorated with flured volutes representing lyre-shaped patterned scrolls and palmettes. Lower corners of the pediment are voluted acrotería and in tympanum is a shallow niche (Fig. 74). Total H. 1.05m. Architrave H. 0.64 Cornice H. 0.18 Tympanum H. 0.27 L. 0.45 Ridge acroterion baseH. 0.10 W. 0.33 D. 0.12m.

H.

0.73 D.

0.11

Lower

acroteria

VIL2.4 Classical — Hellenistic Entablatures (Fig. 289)

i N. 197 Elements found as debris consist of the following: architrave course with taenia, regulae and six guttae; frieze metope and triglyph with three shank femurs and cap combined with taenia showing red pigment; cornice course with small frieze element below cyma reversa; soffit of corona shows plain mutule, above which is small cavetto fillet with cymatium showing cyma reversa (Fig.116). Restored ele. vation indicates that twelve triglyphs and eleven metopes formed the frieze. Total H. 0.77 W. 5.32m. Architrave H. 0.28 W. unknown Th. 0.51 Frieze course H. 0.26 W. unknown Th. 0.51 Metope W. 0.28 Triglyph W. 0.19 Cornice course H. 0.18-0.23 W.unknown, overall W. 0.60 including 0.18m moulding. i N. 83 Elements unknown, only sills for supporting entablature remain to give indications of size and proportions, which would reach above natural rock surface (Fig. 170). Total H. 0.77 W. 2.70m. Lower sill H. 0.43 D. 0.42 Upper sill H. 0.24 D. 0.14m. ü N. 83-BF Three courses in situ, the lowest forming sima with fillet and cyma reversa with sloping sill showing two later cut recessed areas for block stelai (Fig. 297). Sill ends in acroteria used as bases for projecting antae to form screen. Above are two courses of pseudoisodomic work and evidence for a fourth course followed by a fifth showing the cornice, not recorded as debris but giving estimated H.2.15m (Fig. 178).

© Horn (1943), 197-198 Abb. 27.

506

Total H. 1.33 W. 5.70m. Course 1 H. 050 W.2.86 Sill D. 0.66 Course 2 H. 0.32 W. 2.29 Course 3 H.051 W233m. VIL.2.5 Classical - Hellenistic Screen

i N. 34 Panelled screen with aptae (Fig. 101), rock-cut base with continuous moulding course showing cyma reversa, above which are six broad recessed panels. The latter feature would have been represented on the screen of orthostats, now missing, probably additionally capped by a cornice course. Total H. 0.84 L. 5.04m. Anta base W. 0.43, shaft 0.25 Panels W. 0.41 Vertical dividers W. 0.275m. VIL3.0 Entrances and Doorslabs

This deals with the range of entrances and doorslabs relating mainly to the rock-cut tombs and built shrine and temple tombs on the Northern Necropolis. In Archaic Doric tombs (VIL3.12) the entrance shows a rebated surround for the reception of a flanged doorslab. Archaic Ionic Tomb N.8 probably had a panelled door. Only in Classical Doric loculus-type tombs do panelled doors become more common, extending also to shrine and built temple tombs (VIL3.4-5, 9); the loculus tomb entrances are normal- or half-size, the latter called here ‘dwarf (VIL3.4). Plain doorslabs occur in chamber loculi, chamber sarcophagi and loculus sarcophagi tombs (VIL3.6-7, 10) The Roman period provides evidence for a pivoted wooden door with a lock (VIL3.8). VIL3.1 Archaic Doric Chamber Entrances (Fig. 290)

i NS Plain entrance, rebated door surround and cymatium with splayed sides, with three orders defined by deep V-shaped horizontal grooves; original raised threshold lowered by 0.18m, reveals show later claw chisel work (Fig. 75) TotalH. 1.77 W. 1.05m, Surround W. 0.09 D. 0.02 Cymatium H. 0.41 W. 1.20 Opening H. 1.47 W. 0.85 D.050m. i N.6 Plain entrance, later recut with shallow rebated surround on exterior for blocking slab, raised threshold (Fig. 75). Opening H. 1.12 W. 0.78 D. 0.46m. Others: N. 7: H. 1.10 W. 0.76 D. 0.65m. N. 9: H. 1.00 W 0.62 D. 0.53m. iii N. 5 Theke, square opening with shallow rebated surround (Fig. 75). Opening H. 0.92 W. 0.75m. VIL3.2 Aeolic Chamber Entrances (Fig.290)

i N.2 Plain square entrance, raised threshold, original blocking slab missing (Fig. 76). OpeningH. 1.04 W. 1.12D. 0.60m.

Other: N. 4 H. 1.11 W. 0.70 D. 056m. ü N.3 Similar to i but shows remains of plain border (Fig. 76). Opening H. 1.02 W. 0.95 D. 053m. ‘VIL3.3 Archaic Ionic Chamber Entrance i

N.8

Entrance with raised threshold, decorated with raised surround in three orders of a plain rebate

bordered by plain astragal, which below cymatium is decorated with bead and reel, above which is lesbian cyma, which also incorporates the voluted consoles (Fig. 74)

? Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 80; RoweII PL 17c.

507 ‘Total H. 1.90 W. 1.08m. Cymatium H. 0.10 W. 1.07 Consoles H. 0.31 W. 0.08 Opening H. 1.54 W. 0.61 D. 046m. VIL5.4 Classical - Hellenistic Fagade Loculus Entrances (Fig. 291)

i N. 197 Loc. 1 Facade entrance and cymatium identical to i , Incomplete plain slab in situ, roll moulding at bottom with central lever hole, above which is a vertical fillet; probably painted with panelling (Fig. 116) Total H. 2.48 W. 1.29m. Opening H. 2.20W. 0.93 D. 0.38m. Slab H. - W. 0.93 Th. 0.38m.

i N.83 Loc. Similar to i but cymatium differs (Fig. 170).

Total H.2.09 W. 1.29m. OpeningH. 1.85 W. 0.87 D. 0.47m.

iü N. 13 Loc. 1 Plain facade entrance, slab in situ, upper corner missing, front badly spalled but shows remains of two panels (Fig. 64). Opening H. 1.40 W. 0.89 D. 0.34m. Others: N. 12 Locs. 1-2, N. 13 Loc. 2,N. 34

v. N. 8BF Loc. 1 Plain fagade, dwarf entrance, panelled slab with central lever hole at foot (Fig. 178). Opening H. 1.20 W. 0.88 D. 0.45m. Slab H. 1.20W. 0.88 Th. 0.42m.

VIL3.5 Classical-Hellenistic Wide Chamber Loculus Entrances (Fig. 292)

i. N.401 Built chambranle and panelled slab lost (Fig. 91). Only entrance cut in rock survives with groove above for dispersal of rainwater (Fig. 101). Opening H. 0.95 exposed W. 0.68 D.033m. i N. 10 Facade entrance, raised surround with cymatium extensively damaged, straight-sided reveals Loculi entrances in same order as facade entrance, square pryhole in middle of each threshold, reveals slightly rebated for doorslabs, now missing; cymatium identical to that used on Tomb N. 197 (Figs. 64, 116). Facade entrance total H. 2.30 W. 1.50 m. Opening H. 2.13 W. 1.00 D. 0.54 Surround W. 0.18 Entrance Loc. 1 total H. 1.90 W. 1.24 Opening HI. 1.68 W. 0.91 D. 0.45 Surround W. 0.16 Pryhole L. 0.06 W. 0.10 D.0.05 m. Other: N. 11 facade entrance total H. 2.02 W. 0.92, raised surround W. 0.18 m. VIL3.6 Classical-Hellenistic Rectangular Chamber Loculus Entrances (Fig. 292)

i Copland Tomb Facade entrance buried, external decoration unknown, probably without door slab. Internal entrances differ in height by 0.20 m, higher examples being Locs. 1-2, 9-10, whereas Locs. 3-8 are low (Fig. 61). Internal entrance Loc.2, door slab face down, plain with central lever hole at foot. Facade entrance opening H. 1.55 W. 1.04 D. — Loc. 2 opening H. 1.30 W. 0.80 D. 0.26 m.

VIL3 Classical-Hellenistic Sarcophagus Chamber Tombs i N.81-O Plain facade entrance, slab in situ, plain front, upper corner broken (Fig. 198). Slab H. 1.20 W. 0.75 Th.0.40m. Other: N. 81, N. 81 bis, N. I-A. * Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 17; Rowe II Pl. 15a; Bacchielli (1992) Fig. 7. ὁ Rowe I Fig. XI.

508 VIL3.8 Roman Cubiculum Entrance

iN. 241 Plain entrance cut into quarry face. Internal rebate with pivotal socket in soffit of entrance on west side for inward-opening wooden door (Fig. 58). Evidence for lock mortice concealed by modern mortar. Opening H. 1.84 W. 0.96 D. 0.45 Rebate W. 0.10 D. 0.18 Pivot Dia. 0.09 D. 0.06 Wooden door H. 1.84 W. 1.06 Th.0.10 m. Other: N. 82 facade entrance." Opening H. 1.93 W. 1.05 D. 0.48 m.

VIL.3.9 Classical-Hellenistic Shrine Tomb Entrances (Fig. 292)

i Ν. 57 Entrance similar to ii but without built surround. Panelled door slab as ii, lower part surviving, retained by rebated ends of panelled orthostats (Fig. 107) Opening H. 2.00 W. 0.95 m. Slab surviving H. 1.32 W. 0.86 Th. 0.34 m. ii N. 201 Entrance with chambranle built into rebated returns of panelled orthostats. Only weathered stumps remain in situ. Doorslab same as i with panelling partially obscured (Fig. 123). Opening H. 2.12 W. 1.00D. 0.28m.

VIL3.10 Classi i

|-Hellenistic Temple Tomb Entrance

N. 1bis 1 Entrances concealed. Plain door surround, panelled slabs in situ, front showing a frame with

transom and central overlapping vertical fillet concealing junction of two doors, no fittings represented, at foot a central lever hole (Fig. 99). Slab H. 1.51 W. 0.84 Th. 0.24 m.

VIL3.11 Classical-Hellenistic Loculus Sarcophagus Entrances

i N. 197 forecourt Plain unpanelled block reused in loculus interior as a plug (Figs. 112, 304). Approx. L. 1.20 W. 0.50 Th. 0.40 m. Other: N. 81-UU missing VIL4.0 Roman Cubiculum Murals

Evidence for mural painting is confined entirely to the Roman period. A fragment of a mural in Tomb N. 5 portico existing beside the entrance close to a rock-cut niche could be early Roman (11.4.3; VIL7.0). Those from the Roman cubiculum tombs such as Tombs N. 241 and N. 83 are confined to the arcosolium recesses, their cases and surrounds (VIL4.1-2). Painted inscriptions in the latter on the spandrels of the tomb’s arcade include a Christian example concerning Demetria, who died in an earthquake, possibly that of A.D.365 (VIL4.3; VIL12.7).. VIL4.1 Mural of the Good Shepherd (Fig. 293)

Tomb N. 241 Arcosolium 7 Inside recess H. 2.66 L. 2.22 m the decoration is divided into three, the bowl and the peacock, which is the main subject, surrounded by the twelve fish. The surface has been covered with a sandy lime mortar Th. 0.012 m, on which is a thick, smooth white

"© Fairman Arch, Rowe Ph. 108; Rowe II Pl. 41a.

509

plaster scree, Pigments used appear to be: deep red ochre, light red ochre, yellow ochre, olive green, dark blue/grey, light grey and white, similar to the colours used in N. 83 below. Brushstrokes are W. 0.01 m on peacock and W. 0.025 m on Fish 7. Missing lid most likely decorated on side; only imprint in plaster remains Th. 0.14 m (Π.2.3)."

Sarcophagus case H. 0.82 L. 2.22 m. Subject begins 0.10 m above step." Two swags W. 0.11 m. in light and dark olive green meet in the middle, commencing from edge of case. On either side, placed 0.20 and 0.23 m in from edges of mural, are two vertical motifs W. 0.08 m in light red ochre with dark red shadow and black lining, bordered with pairs of olive green leaves, shown in bamboolike sections. A fluttering red painted ribbon W. 0.012 m fills space below swags. Remains of central figure of Good Shepherd (Luke 15:4-7; John 10:11-6) surviving H. 0.56 W. 0.45 m shows lower part of head, approx.0.10 m below case rim. The arms cannot now be seen except for pedum which is black. The sagum over the shoulders is shown in deep and light red, blue/black and dark yellow ochre and skin tones in dark and light red, outlined in blue/black. Dark brown boot visible on right foot. Six sheep in deep yellow ochre, details outlined in dark brown, cluster around shepherd’s legs against a pale yellow ochre background. On northern side: Sheep 1: standing looking attentively at shepherd, body H. 0.21 L. 034 m. In front are two sheep sitting down, Sheep 2: in front of Sheep 3, giving impression of perspective, with right foot forward, knee raised and head turned back. Sheep 3: between 1 and 2, looking up at shepherd, On southern side: anding, head missing. remnant of head above Sheep 4

On shoulders of shepherd: Sheep 7: tal, part of foreleg and chest visible,

races only.

Pilaster There is a deep red border W. 0.09 m around exterior of arcosolium arch, springing from a cavetto impost Niche Centrepiece of design is on lunette,? commencing with a bowl depicted mostly in red/ yellow ochre, and outlined in blue/black, H. 0.41 W. 1.45 m overall including looped handles in yellow ochre, painted as if resting on missing sarcophagus lid Th. 0.14 m. Decoration on vessel seems to be of a random nature in blue/black, and it has a piecrust rim, no footring shown. Inside vessel is a cluster of flowers H. 0.18 W. 1.16 m, red picked out with blue/black and bordered by green leaves. Underneath bowl are two olive green stems with leaves, terminating in carnation-like flower in light red on each side. Above this a peacock displays his feathers H. 1.16 W. 1.42 m, very worn, Main body of bird chiefly blue/grey H. 0.83 W. 0.26 m with light red marks at head end and spread legs in dark grey. This is bordered by a vesica shape in blue/grey, in which are painted crescent-shaped strokes. Around bird are the tail feathers in three rows of deep red, picked out in light red and blue/grey. Border of tail shown in blue/grey, giving wreath-like appearance to subject. Conch Around the peacock the scene becomes an aquatic one, with a line of twelve fish at

" Bacchielli (19932) Fig. 25; (1993b), 3-21 Taw LIT. Bacchieli(1993a) Fig. 21 ® Bacchielli (19933) Fig. 22.

510

various angles; of the various species Fish 3 seems to represent a flatfish. Spaces between the fish filled with random strokes of olive green.

Fish 1: Blue/grey highlighted with deep yellow ochre. Tail fins crudely represented; dorsal fins show five main barbs, picked out in yellow ochre. Flashes of red appear on rear of body and in region of ‘open mouth. Eye picked out in light grey. No scales shown. L. 0.58 W. 0.23 m. Fish 2: Mainly blue/grey, mouth open and picked out in red. Tail fins are indicated; dorsal fins picked out in yellow ochre, also front of head highlighted in deep yellow ochre. Scales and gills shown as rough flecks of grey. L. 0.60 W. 0.22 m. Fish 3: Mostly blue/grey. Tail fins well represented; no dorsal fins shown. Fleck of red shown in position of mouth; no light grey used. L. 0.46 W. 0.16 m. Fish 4: Mostly blue/grey. Tail commences from dorsal fins of Fish 1, but is damaged; dorsal fin in yellow ‘ochre. Eye and mouth not visible. Scales indicated by diagonal flecks and ticks of light grey, red fleck by gills and another on abdominal area. L. 077 W. 0.23 m. Fish 5: Mostly blue/grey with pointed head, eye picked out in white and mouth open showing deep red. Tail fins incomplete; dorsal fins simply represented in blue/grey. Gills indicated by light grey, row of white dots from mouth to top of abdominal area, where there is a fleck o£ red. L. 0.47 W. 0.17 m. Fish 6: Much eroded, very crudely represented in blue/grey and yellow ochre. Green leaves of the ruffled band overlap this fish. L. 0.50 W. 0.16 m. Fish 7: Dark blue/grey, highlighted with yellow ochre, a streak of which appears down centre. Tail fin simplified; dorsal fins indicated in yellow ochre. White paint used to represent eye and open mouth. L. 0.37 W. 0.11 m. Fish 8 Treatment similar to Fish 2: mostly blue/grey. Tail fins indicated; dorsal fins in yellow ochre, indicated by five strokes of brush, Open mouth infilled with deep red, large red fleck appears in abdominal area. L. 0.50 W. 0.17 m. Fish 9: Mostly yellow ochre with blue/grey used for shadow. Open mouth indicated in red. Tail fins well indicated and dorsal fins shown. L. 0.35 W. 0.12 m. Fish 10: Turning as it swims. Mainly light red/yellow ochre with dark red flecks, shadow shown by dark blue/grey under fish, as well as pectoral, dorsal and tail fins. L. 0.40 W. 0.19 m. Fish 11: Extremely obliterated. Blue/grey used, mouth shown in red and scales indicated in light grey. L. 0.39 W. 0.19m.

Fish 12: Looking up towards Fish 11. Very much spalled. Mostly blue/grey, in certain areas almost black. Mouth shown in light red, red fleck on abdominal area. L. 0.40 W. 0.24 m.

On soffit of arch is a light red raffled band W. 0.10 m, deep red along its centre with a green bow at each end, set in 0.09 m from border, springing from abacus level of lower pilaster. Pairs of green leaves on either side of ruffled band at intervals of 0.09-0.10 m, possibly dabbed on with a finger. VIIL4.2 Mural of the Winged Figures (Fig. 294)

Tomb N. 83 Arcosolium 12 Inside recess H. 3.75 L. 235 m decoration is divided into four, the inner upper and lower bands which confine the dado and the main subject in the conch. On a mortar rendering is a layer of white plaster Th.0.005 m. Pigments used appear to be deep red ochre, red ochre, yellow ochre, blue/black and olive green, similar to the range of colours used in

N. 241 above (IIL1.3).*

Sarcophagus case H. 0.97 L. 2.08 m is plastered over, partially infilling vertical recessed moulding by pilasters. Decoration survives mainly at southern end by pilaster, central subject lost. "* Bacchielli (1992), 5-22; (19934) Fig. 25.

511

Surviving is a deep red border W. 0.25 πὶ around case incorporating border of pilaster decoration described below. Inside case border is a black line W. 0.006 m. From top corners swags of green leaves W. 0.005 m hang by deep red ribbons W. 0.008 m, with scribbled garlands W. 0.06 m hanging down to bottom comers. Single guilloche in blue/black on front edge of bevelled moulding on case rim.

Pilaster with bevelled capital H. 2.09 W. 0.52 m. Decoration has deep red borderW. 0.045 m. Central vertical hanging leaf motif in blue/black, upper part not surviving, festooned at middle and base with bows of deep red ribbon W. 0.008 m. Motif terminates below base ribbon with spherical shape narrowing to a point." A patterned band W. 0.26 m around exterior of arcosolium arch springs from bevelled capitals of pilasters, with a pair of deep red border bands W. 0.06 m confining flowered wreath-like design in green and deep red." A horizontal red band at junction with ceiling continues down on either side to bevelled capitals, and spandrel shows remains of possible rosette in red. Niche Inner lower band W. 0.24 m with inner deep red border W. 0.06 m starts above case lid. On northern side a spade-shaped cantharos in yellow ochre and grey H. 0.40 W. 0.24 begins 0.37 m above case. Emerging from cantharos two intertwined stems in yellow ochre W. 0.024 m continue above bevelled capital to form the inner upper band W. 0.28 m, interspersed with green leaves and red flowers formed of dots, now extremely fragmentary. Dado extends from top of case lid to bevelled capital level commencing with a red border which continues over and around case sill at the back and ending with deep red band W. 0.06 m. It contains a lattice design of running tendril pattern formed by forty crossed diagonal lines of yellow ochre covered by small splashes of green, creating lozenges H. 0.24 W. 0.22 Sq 0.160 m containing three different floral designs in repeating diagonal rows. Lozenge 1. Large yellow ochre central dot Dia.0.04 with green leaves L. 0.06m radiating ou. Lozenge 2. Sprig of three deep red flowers with stems, green leaves radiating from them. Lozenge 3. Small yellow ochre central dot, four paired leaves in cruciform shape radiating from dot, between which are four deep red flowers. Conch above dado and bevelled capitals has badly spalled subject of painted figures and birds." Central winged figure, H. 0.74 W. foot to foot 0.53 m running to right is in yellow ochre, with red ochre used for shading. Right wing is in yellow/grey L. 0.29 m picked out in darker grey. Figure appears naked except for remains of drapery on cither side, dull yellow ochre picked out in grey." Two other small figures, the right one better preserved H. 0.62 W. foot to foot 0.50 m,” running and looking up at central figure. Figure on south side similar size but indistinct, and seems to be running to left. Drapery appears to consist of a loincloth, seen around northern small figure. Below winged figure are birds 1 and 2, apparently peacocks, not displaying, in red ochre, wings outlined in black. Crest blue/black, head, neck and breast pale blue/grey, outlined in blue/ black. Legs in red ochre shaded on one side with blue/black.” Birds 3 and 4 differ and are smaller, situated between peacocks and central figure. Intervening spaces filled with scribbled garlands in deep red, W. 0.04 m, interspersed with green leaves and deep red flowers. Bird 1. Peacock facing right, slightly in front of the other, L. 1.02 W. torso 0.19, legs L. 0.13 m.

? 7 5 ?* ? ®

Bacchielli (19934) Fig. 25. Smith and Porcher (1864) Pl 17. Bacchielli (1992) Tav.La-b. Rowe II PI. B. RowellPL A. Bacchielli (19932) Fig. 26.

512

Bird 2. Peacock facing right, details as Bird 1, legs now missing, L. 0.96, torso W. 0.20 m. Bird 3. Between peacock and central figure facing right, yellow ochre picked out in blue/black for wings, beak, eye etc. Feet clearly seen. Total H. 0.14 L. 0.33 m! Bird 4. Now indistinct, in front of central figure, same colours as Bird 3. VIL4.3 Painted Cubiculum Inscriptions

The following readings were given by Dr Joyce Reynolds of Newnham College, Camb: N.83 inscription Ia-b in south-west corner of cubiculum above Cinerary Niche 9, continuing over adja. cent Arcosolium 11 spandrel. Inscription incomplete, based on Pacho (CIG 5149), cut with V-shaped section, picked out in black paint. Inscription Ia above Cinerary Niche 9 runs from ceiling downwards for 0.60 m and extends for about 0.90 m from corner. Inscription Ib confined within southern spandrel of Arcosolium 11, continues down to 0.94 m (Fig. 173) Letters aH. 0.060 m Roman 3rd cent A.D. bH. 0.090 m Tb. OTOY[.]A[]INYNOC -JEOTOYoKI ]M[]POYSOCToMA JIPAM[]oAI

i

5

-JAAE[.]TPOTKA ]HIZME -MANIO[.]AOTON JNA

4

KL vac. L. c5...vac. vac [] OP [..] AK vac EAHIKOA®ONvac. CXECL JO vac. OE vacat ü N. 83 Inscriptions ITa-b on north wall of cubiculum. Inscription IIa, letters painted in red, damaged by three small lamp niches and covered by resulting soot. Eastern side partly obliterated by IIb (Fig. 173)" Inscription ΠΡ complete (CIG 9136), letters painted in red, brushstrokes approx. 0.007 m across. 10

Inscription area L. 1.16 H. 0.72 m,” base of inscription 2.68 m from floor and 0.20 m from north-east

corner (Fig. 173).

= ® ® ® 3 *

Rowe IP. B. Pacho (1827) Pl. LXIV; Smith and Porcher (1864) Pl. 17; Rowe II, 11 n. 2 Fig. X. Bacchielli (1992), 16-17 Fig. 15. Bacchielli (1992), 17-22 Fig. 14. Pacho (1827), 395 Pl. LXILL9; Comparett (1914), 161-167 Fig. 3; Ant. Dept, Cyr. Ph. 22 ΟἹ. Reynolds (2008), 176.

513

Roman later 4th cent A.D.

Πα.

1YM ]AOYAOY

1 JAME@A 5 JAYTHN „JABZATO -]CONI ]HATHP JMEo 10 1CIC». νας, Tib. — X Auuxo(a θυγάτηρ, Γαίου τοῦ ὠνησαμένου τὸ μνημῖο(ν) τοῦτο ἔνθαδε κῖτε μετὰ τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτῆς Θεω5 δούλου οὗτοι ἐτελεύτησαν ἐπὶ ἄγρου Mugomwλᾶ σισμοῦ 10

γενομένου τέθικαν αὐτὸς Κάλλιππος ó|v) ἀνὴρ αὐτῆς κὲ [xà] υἱὸς αὐτοῦ Γάϊος κὲ γαμBocó(c) αὐτοῦ Πολύβουλος

K (Gove μνησθήτω tov ἐντὸ(ς) σπηλέOv τούτου vacat

Letters a H. 0070 m. b H. 0.060 - 0.045m.

llb. X AIMITPIA OYTATHP TAIOY TOY o NHCAMENOY

TO MNHMIO TOYTO ENOAAE KITE

META TOY YIOY AYTHC GEo 5 — AOYAOY OYTOI ETEAEYTHCAN ἘΠῚ AFPOY MYPOIIoAA CICMOY TENOMENOY TE@IKAN AYTOC KAAAINTIOC ON ANHP AYTHC KE KE YIOC AYTOYTAIOC KE AM 10. BPEO AYTOYTIOAYBOYAOC KE MNHCOHTo TOY ENTO CIIHAE. OY TOYTOY vacat Ib. Dimitria, daughter of Gaius, who bought this tomb, lies here with her son Theodoulos. They died on the farm Myropolas in an earth-

quake. Callippos himself, her husband, buried them and his son Gaius and his brotherin-law Polyboulos. Lord remember those within this cave.

BuniAL FURNITURE

VIL5.0 Klinai

The archaic low kline in Tomb N. 3 chamber was cut in situ. Others were formed by removing a square area in the centre of the chamber floor, as in Tomb N. 4. The rectangular leg on the Tomb N. 3 kline is similar to the capital decoration cut on the pillars of Tomb N. 4 facade (1.1.2), suggesting the original existence of an abacus which supported a bolster. Examples around the enclosure of Tomb N. 1 have been resited, so their primary positions are unclear (VIL52) VIL5.1 Aeolic Chamber Klinai (Fig. 295)

i

N. 3 Low klinai cut in situ on chamber floor around all four sides (Figs. 76, 78). On east side a small Aeolic capital cut on rectangular leg. Overall H. 0.37 L. 1.91 W. 0.85 m. dO N.4 Cut in situ asi, but undecorated, and could be cut more recently (Fig. 76). H. 0.38 L. 1.95 W. 1.03 m.

514 VIL5.2 Classical-Hellenistic Enclosure Klinai

i. N. 1 Enclosure. Five low block-cut examples, squared headrest W. 0.01 m projecting 0.04 m above horizontal frame, with upper surface struck off in each case. Stonework recessed on all four sides to depth of 0.03 m with surround of 0.08 m to indicate legs and frame (Fig. 96). Overall: H. 032 L. 1.71 W.0.83 m. ‘VIL6.0 Tables

Stone tables were found in association with sarcophagi in enclosures. A very small block table found in 1956 is untraced; other examples iii-iv, which have deteriorated since their discovery in 1957, have been reconstructed from the remaining evidence. Three-Iegged examples in various sizes are the most common, which were block-cut and moved into position. The legs were cut only on the three main exposed sides, leaving the unviewed fourth side unworked. Comparative examples in the Northern Necropolis at Cyrene were found near Tomb N. 184 forecourt and in front of a sarcophagus with stepped lid VIL6.1 Classical-Hellenistic Enclosure Large Tables (Fig. 295) N. 81:8 Lower Enclosure.

i

Block-cut (Fig.

202).” Three-legged, flat top surface Th.0.05 m pitted by

weathering, north-west corner missing. Legs project 0.01 m beyond table edge, supported by two flat swan-necked shoulder brackets and underneath by flat connecting rails H. 0.05 m. Individual legs concave at front and sides, tapering W. 0.13, 0.07, 0.10 to rectangular foot H. 0.07 m showing astragal with scotia between fillets. Overall H. 0.46 L. 1.23 W. 0.65 m. Other: N. 354 vicinity H. 047 L. 140 W. 0.71 m. ü N.81-B Upper Enclosure. As i without shoulder brackets (Fig. 202). Overall H. 0.44 L. 1.28 W. 0.66 m. ΨΠ.6.2 Classical-Hellenistic Enclosure Small Tables

Hi N.SI-BB Four-legged, side panels with connecting central rail (Fig. 203).” H. 0.39 L. 0.85 W. 0.52 m. iv N.81-KK As i but smaller, plain rectangular club foot (Fig. 203)” H. 0.30 L. 0.81 W. 0.58 m. v N. 83. Untraced, similar to iv, annotated sketch (Fig. 258)." VIL7.0 Niches (Fig. 296)

‘A Classical-Hellenistic niche on Archaic Ionic Tomb N. 8 (VIL7.1) is possibly contemporary with the shallow inset panels on Tombs N. 34 and E. 174 (VII.17.2-3). The majority belong to the carly Roman period, connected with the use of funeral busts and cut mainly on the fagades of earlier rock-cut tombs (VIL7.4-7). These fall into characteristic types, round-headed niches Type A 7. # ? » >

Fairman Arch. Rowe Fairman Arch. Rowe Fairman Arch. Rowe Rowe Il, 8 Fig. XIV. Burns Arch. Rowe's

Ph. 164; Rowe Il, 7 Fig. XIV PI. 20b. Phs.118-119; Rowe II, 7 Fig, XIV Pl. 20a, c. Ph. 213; Rowe Il, 8 Fig. XIV Pl. 18a. 1956 Day Book fol. 6.

515

(RHN) and square niches Type B (SN). In the latter the niche depth is a diagnostic feature, suggesting an inset inscribed marble panel. Shallow niches were probably for painted inscriptions or portraits. There is also an example with cut inscription by Tomb N. 12 rocky outcrop (Fig, 61). These types are outlined below for simplicity. Round-headed Niches RHN Type A.1 Straight-sided with rounded top A Splayed sides with rounded top A3 Splayed sides with horseshoe top AA Variant

Square Niches SN Type B.1 Vertical rectangular B2 Horizontal rectangular B3 Square B4 Variant

VIL7.1 Classical-Hellenistic Half-Figure Niche

i N.8 Pediment niche cut in tympanum, removing part of cornice, and at the apex, part of leaf and dart decoration. Appears as a shallow silhouette with flat back in the shape of a small iconic half-figure (Figs 74,254). Total H. 0.61 Shoulder H. 0.40 W. 0.52 D.0.20 m at cornice. VIL7.2 Classical-Hellenistic Inset Panel

i N. 34 Plain shallow square panel cut above door, height truncated by later stepped base of rock-cut screen (Fig. 101). H. 0.23 W. 0.21 D.004 m. VII.7.5 Classical-Hellenistic Fixed Inset i

E.174 Rowe: ‘a small inset in the masonry with three perforations on its lower edge’ (11.11.3).*

VIL7.4 Roman Funerary Niches on Archaic Doric Tombs (Fig. 296) i. N. 5 Horizontal rectangular niche, central raised gable cut with drove chisel above column 3 on epistyle (Fig. 75). Comparable niche within entrance of Tomb W. 111. a RHN

TypeA4

H.0.19

W.032

D.0.08m

a b

TypeA3 TypeB.

H.039 H.033

W.027 W.0.18

D.0.13m D.0.12m

ü N. 5 In portico Niches a-d above and around entrance with Niche e beside theke showing mural fragment painted to the left; Niche d shallow for purpose of inserting panel; other niches rounded at back with conch (Fig. 75). c

RHN SN

SN

d SN

TypeB.l

H.030

W.0.19

D.0.16m

TypeBl

H.044 W.038

D.0.06m

e

RHN

TypeA.l

H.037

W.025

D.020m

a

SN

TypeB3

H.019

W.0.19

D.0.10m

di N. 6 In portico above entrance, flat-backed (Fig. 75). a SN TypeBl H.028 W.0.16 D.0.llm iv N.7In portico, as ii (Fig. 75). ® Rowe I, 7 Εἰς. 1.

516

v. Ν᾿ 9 In portico either side of entrance close to ceiling. Horizontal cramp holes in niche corners (Fig. 74). TypeB2 H.053 W.062 D.005m a SN TypeB2 1.065 W.071 D.0.05m b SN VII.7.5 Roman Funerary Niches on Aeolic Tombs (Fig. 296)

io N.2anta, lat-backed, placed one above the other. Niche c at the top has cut gable (Fig. 76). TypeB3 H.036 W.04 D.004m a SN b SN TypeB3 H.035 W.046 D.004m c RHN TypeAl H.047 W.029 D. 0.15m ii N.2in portico above entrance. Dowel holes noticed in association with flat-backed Niches a-b half-way up the sides, with a random scatter around the outsides; Niche c shows pointed apex (Fig. 76). a RHN TypeAl H.031 W.018 D.0.4m b RHN TypeA3 H.042 W.030 D.0.14m e SN TypeB4 H.060 W.024 Ὁ. 0.17πὶ i N.3 in portico, ranged above entrance, flat-backed (Fig. 76). a RHN TypeA2 H.041 W.032 D.0.l4m b RHN TypeAl H.039 W.021 D.0.10m c RHN TypeA2 H.038 W.0.23 D.0.12m d RHN TypeA2 H.048 W.038 D.020m e RHN TypeA2 H.048 W.028 D.0.15m iv N. 4 in portico above entrance, mainly flat-backed; Niche d roughly-cut; Niche e shallow with pairs of ^mocs

small dowel holes near corners (Fig. 76). SN TypeB3 H.047 W.039 SN TypeB. H.040 W.025

SN

TypeB.l

H.041

W.030

SN

TypeB2

H.1.16

W.028

SN

TypeB2

H.060 W.081

D.0.09m D.0.19m

D.0.18m

D.0.03m

D.02m

VIL7.6 Roman Funerary Niches on Archaic Ionic Tomb (Fig. 296)

iN. in a b c

8in portico symmetrically placed either side of entrance. A pair of dowel holes 0.69m apart noticed entrance surround (Fig. 74). RHN TypeA4 H.041 W.022 D.012m RHN TypeA3 H.035 W.022 D.0.11m DowelHoles Dia. 0.03 D.005 m

VIL7.7 Roman Funerary Niches on Classical-Hellenistic Tombs (Fig. 296)

iN, 10 above entrance. Dowel holes noticed in association with niches c, d, f, g, j. These are roughly halfway up the niches at the sides, either bordering the outside or just inside the edge, generally in pairs, with a third hole sometimes at the foot as in Niches e and j. Cartouche Niche k contains Niches a and b and is bordered by a double pair of dowel holes. Niche d shows a pair of dowel holes and is probably related to Niche e which is deeper than the others (Fig. 64). a RHN TypeAl H.023 W.0.11 D.007m b RHN TypeA1 H.030 W.014 D.007m c RHN TypeAl H.025 W.0./3 D.0.09m d

SN

TypeB2

H.015

W.027

D.0.05m

517 mmm

RHN TypeA.l RHN TypeA.l RHN TypeAl RHN TypeAl RHN TypeA.i RHN TypeAl RHN TypeA4 ji N. 83 forecourt niche a RHN TypeAl

11.032 H.0.19 H.025 H.0.28 H.031 H.024 H.038 reused as H.040

W.021 D.0.12m W.0.08 D.0.04m W.013 D.009m W.0.16 D.0.10m W.0.15 D.0.10m W.0.14 D.007m W.043 D.0.10m a sluice from cistern N. 83-X behind (Fig. 172)" W.024 D.028m

VIL8.0 Tomb Inscriptions These inscriptions are mainly Hellenistic on Classical Doric loculus tomb entrances (VIL8.1) with remnants of another elsewhere (VIL8.2); miscellaneous graffiti were noticed in one of the archaic tombs but none of the inscriptions referred to by Pacho (1.2.2 Tomb C); an example also survives on N. 1 temenos wall (VII.83). The following readings were given by Dr Joyce Reynolds. VILS.1 Classical-Hellenistic Facade Loculus Tombs

i

N. 197 Loc2, inscription above entrance, rough V-shaped cuts (SEG XVI 869b) L. 1.05m, name (LGPN I, 311), excavation (Fig. 116)

Greek c300 B.C. APXITIAMHNOA@Po

᾿Αρχύπ(π)α Μηνοδώρω,

Letters H. 0.065 - 0.080 m. Archip(p)a (daughter) of Menodoros

i N. 197 Loc. 3, two-line inscription as i (SEG XVI 869a), name (LGPN I, 382), excavation (Fig. 116). Greek c300 B.C. Letters H. 0.035 m. ΔΡΑΚΩΝΠΟΣΕΙΔΙΠΠΩ Δράκων Tloosıdtano

A]TEMONAAPAKQNTOX CA ]reuóva Δράκωντος

ii

Dracon

(son) of Poseidippos

Hagemona (daughter) of Dracon

N.83 Loc. 2, inscription on door surround below cymatium, extremely weathered (Fig. 170).

Greek c. 300 B.C.

Letters H. 0.06 m.

[.]RIHI VIL8.2 Classical-Hellenistic Sarcophagi Chamber Tomb

i| N.SLA, three-line inscription above door cymatium (Fig. 196). Greek.

AIZ ο Ε

? Rowe Il, 11 Fig. X.

cent. B.C.

Letters H. 0.060 m.

518 VILS.3 Graffiti on Archaic Chamber Tomb

N.4 southern end of eastern wall of chamber near ceiling, now obliterated by limewash (Fig. 76). Greek cent. BC. Letters H. 0.012 m. KAA ii N. 1enclosure wall, south-east corner inner face, third course above kline, inscription on ashlar block in situ L. 1.220 H. 0.450 m, weathered (Fig. 96).* Greek cent, B.C. Letters H. 0.060 m. i

BuniAL MONUMENTS

VIL9.0 Stelai

These stelai, discovered in 1925, were all reassembled by Maioletti; they fall into three main types, stele monuments (VII.9.1), stepped stele bases (VIL9.2) and pedestal monuments (VI.93), but comparisons can be made with a few others in Cyrene (Figs. 245, 258-259). VII.9.1 Stele Monuments

(Figs. 55-56)

Diagnostic Description A foundation course formed by two ashlar blocks side by side supports a double or treble block-built stepped base. Top surface of upper step shows a centrallyplaced cut mortice to engage with a projecting tenon under a stele pedestal. The pedestal shows a cavetto base, plain die and bevelled cornice. Above is a straight-sided, slightly tapering stele shaft, culminating in a moulded cornice and blocking course. i Maioletti E In situ. Base: top step much weathered, partly covered in hillwash, Dimensions: Base: first step H. - L. 1.28 W. - m, second step H. 0.55 Sq. 0.84 m. ii N. 380 Rowe M.18 Base: foundation and double-stepped. Stele: plinth, double bevelled cornice, shaft cornice with rounded astragal, cavetto and cyma recta, blocking course damaged. Dimensions: Base: ashlar H. 0.47 L. 1.46 W. 0.65 m, first step H. 0.43 L. 0.90 W. 0.90 m, second step H. 035 L. 0.66 'W. 0.60 m. Stele: plinth H. 0.11, die H. 0.24 L. 0.41 W. 0.28 m, cornice H. 0.08, shaft H. 0.76 L. 0.41 W. 0.27 m, cornice H. 0.05 projects 0.02 m. Total H. 1.24 L. 0.51 W. 0.36 m.

dii N. 381 monument 1 (Fig. 51) Third block step partly projecting above present road surface showing pry hole at bottom. Only stele pedestal survives; shows tenon underneath (Fig, 55). Dimensions: Base: and tenon L. 0.43,W. 0.31,D. 0.05 m. upper step H. 0.36L. 0.73 W. 0.64 m, mortice iv N.381 monument 2 (Fig. 51) Stele: pedestal missing, shaft with pronounced taper, flat back, cornice cavetto and cyma cavetto, blocking course complete. Dimensions: Base: ashlar H. 048 L. 1.18 W. 0.62 m, first step H. 0.36 Sq. 0.90 m, second step H. 038 Sq. 0.70 m. Stele: cornice H. 0.06 projects 0.05 m, blocking course H. 0.05 L. 035 W. 0.18 m. v N. 382 (Fig. 52) Base: foundation and triple-stepped. Stele: re-erected sideways, upper part missing, Dimensions: Base: ashlar H. 0.30 L. 1.28 W. 0.60 m, first step H. 0.36 L. 0.95 W. 0.85 m, second step H. 037 L. 076W. 0.68 m, third step H. 0.36L. 052 W. 051m. vi. N. 383 monument 6, Maioletti B (Fig. 53) Base: foundation undetected, double-stepped. Stele: complete but restored. Dimensions: Base: first step H. 0.39 Sq. 0.90, second step H. 0.39 Sq. 0.68 m. Stele: ? Rowel,58n. 1

519 plinth H. 0.09 m, die H. 0.24 L. 0.40 W. 0.30 m, cornice H. 0.035 m, shaft H. 0.83 L. 0.37 W. 0.27 m,

comice H. 0.04 projects 0.02 m, blocking course H. 0.07 L. 0.33 W. 0.26 m. Total H. 131 L. 0.46 vii. N. 383 monument 7, Maioletti A (Fig. 53) Base: foundation and double-stepped, mortice on top of second step. Dimensions: Base: ashlar H. 0.38 L. 1.18 W. 0.61 m, first step H. 0.38 Sq. 0.92, second step 1.040 $q.0.68 m, mortice L. 038W. 0.28D. 0.06m. vii N. 383 monument 8, Maioletti C Base: triple-stepped, broader proportions than the others. DimenNW. 0.37 m.

sions: Base: first step H. 0.35 L. H. 0.30 L. 0.88 W. 0.60 m.

1.78 W.

1.66 m, second

step H.

0.35 L.

1.18 W.

1.06 m, third. step

ix N. 383 monument 9 (I.1.3; Fig. 54) Stele lying on bank, now in Antiquities Department garden by Antiquarium. Inscription probably cut during Second World War, between 6th February 1941 and 15th November 1942.

OUR SOUL MAY GO TO HILL BUT THE MEMORIES WILL REMAIN TO YOUR HEART WAV Dimensions: Stele: plinth H. 0.04 m, die H. 0.11 L. 0.35 W. 0.25 m, cornice H. 0.06 m, shaft H. 0.69 L. 035 W. 0.25 m, cornice H. 0.04 projects 0.03 m, blocking course H. 0.06 L. 0.33 W. 0.15 m. Total H. 1.03L. 0.41 W. 0.28m.

VIL.9.2 Stepped Stele Bases (Figs. 55-56)

Diagnostic Description A single square block cut with three or four steps, top surface flat, showing no other features. i Maioletti D In situ. Base: quadruple-stepped. Dimensions: Base: H. 0.204 Sq. 0.75 m, first step H. 0.16 Sq. 0.86 m, second step H. 0.16 Sq. 0.80 m, third step H. 0.16 Sq. 0.74 m, fourth step H. 14 Sq. 0.68 m. ii N.383 monument 10 (Fig. 53) Discarded, currently placed on N. 383 monument 5. Dimensions: Third step H. 0.09 L. 0.58 W. 0.54 m, fourth step H. 0.09 L. 0.51 W. 0.48 m.

VII.9.3 Pedestal Monuments

(Fig. 56)

Diagnostic Description Foundation course of thin ashlar blocks, on which is placed the base block formed of several pieces cut with one, two or three low steps. These support the pedestal monument which consists of a base course showing cavetto, two ashlar blocks forming the die and ἃ cornice course with cyma recta and may include a blocking course. The mouldings can be combined with the two blocks forming the die. i N. 383 monument 1, Rowe's M.19 (Fig. 53) Three ashlar pieces in foundation supporting triplestepped base block. Lower half of pedestal survives, plain backed. Original order suggested in illustra tion. Dimensions: Base: slabs H. 0.26 L. 1.33 W. 0.62 and 0.67 m. Pedestal: H. 0.57, L. 1.58 W. 1.24 m. ü N. 383 monument 2 (Fig. 53) Base: double-stepped, upper step edge crudely cut to form third step. Pedestal, base missing, cornice weathered, no blocking course; now inverted, Original order suggested in illustration. Dimensions unavailable.

ii N. 383 monument 3, Rowe’s M.17 (Fig. 53) Base: combination of ashlar pieces. Upper step cut also

520

with base moulding for pedestal, die consisting of two blocks, cornice and blocking course combined in another piece of stone, top plain. Dimensions: Base: slab H. 0.43 L. 1.22 W. 122 m, single step H. 0.19

L. 1.10 W. 0.70 m. Pedestal: plinth H. 0.13 L. 0.84 W. 0.57 m, die lower H. 0.50, upper 0.47, L. 0.70 W. 0.59 m, cornice and blocking course H. 0.13 L. 0.71 W. 0.62 m.

iv. N. 383 monument 4, Rowe's M.1 (Fig. 54) Base: formed of four triple-stepped pieces, one missing. Plain-backed, as N. 383 monument 1. Dimensions: Base: Sq. 1.48 m, blocks H. 0.47 L. 0.74 W. 0.66m. v. N. 385 monument 5 (Fig. 53) Base: triple-stepped, upper step riser sloping inwards towards moulding. Die survives as single ashlar block. Dimensions: Base: first stepH. 0.14 L. 1.07 m, plinth H. 0.14 L. 0.83 m, die H. 0.59L. 0.67 W. 0.59 m.

VII.10.0 Sockets

Rowe recorded evidence of sockets on the central plinth of lids to rock-cut broad and narrow sarcophagi found in his Necropolis excavations (III. 1.0; VIL17.0)." Sockets were also located above the entrance to a rock-cut tomb and on the plinths of a built temple tomb and a loculus sarcophagus (VII.10.1-4). Evidence for statuary was realised by Beschi in that the indent on Sarcophagus N. 81-Q corresponds with the base of the aniconic half-figure. There are also smaller recessed areas which could be for iconic statuary (VII.10.5). The characteristic shapes of the Type B. 13 sockets correspond to Maioletti's interpretation for block stelai, and Type B. 4 to slab stelai (VII.10.6). The smaller sockets would seem to be connected with some form of fixing on the plinths (VII.10.7-8). The characteristic socket types are outlined below for simplicity. Statuary: A.1 Large Half-figure A2 Small Half-figure

Stelai: B.1 Square 22 Semi-square B3 Rectangular

Fixings: C Cramp D Staple.

B.4 Narrow

VIL 10.1 Classical-Hellenistic Facade Loculus Tomb (Fig. 297)

i

Ν. 83-BF Two sockets above Loc.3 on entablature sill, set 0.33m from edge and 0.12m apart in front of

pseudoisodomic screen (Fig. 178). A. TypeBl L.029 W.021 D.006m B. TypeBl L.029 W.021 Ὁ. 005πὶ

VII.10.2 Classical-Hellenistic Sarcophagus Chamber Tomb

i

N.81 Four sockets in a A. TypeB2 L.026 B. TypeBl L.02 C. TypeB2 1.022 D. TypeB3 1.036.

® Rowe Il, 2 Fig. XIIL % Rowe II Fig. XIV.

line above entrance set back by 0.14m (Fig. 195), W.0.16 D.0.10m W.0.10 D.0.07m W.0.17 D.0.10m W.020 Ὁ. 0.10πὶ

521 VII.10.3 Classical-Hellenistic Shrine Tomb

N. 57 Fight sockets appearing as asymmetrical pairs along and across roof plinth. Those facing road on eastern side are set back from edge of plinth, whereas those on western side are partly cut into plinth edge (Fig. 107) A. TypeB2 1.0.16 W.010 D.010m B. TypeBl L.012 W.012 D.020m C. TypeBl L.0.10 W.008 D.0.05m Other: Tomb N. 77 (Fig. 200) D. TypeBl 1.0.12 W.0.10 D.0.15m E. TypeB3 1.022 W.0.14 D.009m EK. TypeB3 L.0.15 W.0.10 D.Ollm G. TypeBl L.0.10 W.012 D.0.18m H. TypeB1 1.013. W.013 D.006m VIL 10.4 Classical-Hellenistic Loculus Sarcophagus Lid

i

N. 81-UU Socket B off-centre on plinth; matching Socket A never cut; Socket C cut on north-east side of rebated sill below plinth (Figs. 200, 257). Plinth L. 0.97 W. 0.83 m. A. TypeB2 uncut B. TypeB2 1.032 W.0.16 D.008m C. TypeB3 1.027 W.012 D.002m

VIL.10.5 Classical-Hellenistic Enclosure Sarcophagi Lids — Type A. (Fig. 297)

N. 81-Q Socket for a large aniconic half-figure and confirmed by matching traced outline of Socket A with base of half-figure (Figs. 255, 305, 390).” Plinth L. 0.62 W. 0.60 m. A. TypeAl 1.057 W.022 Ὁ. 004πὶ N. 81-AC Socket A with empolion, probably for small iconic half-figure (Figs. 203, 305). Plinth L. 0.32 W.027m A. TypeA2 L.025 W.007 D.0.02m Empolion L.002 W.002 D.0.03m N. 83-BP Rounded socket, weathered (Figs. 188, 305). Plinth L. 0.38 W. 0.31 m. A. TypeA2 1.024 W.0.12 D.004m iv N. 83-BR Rounded socket with empolion, weathered (Fig. 188). Plinth L. 0.20 W. 0.22 m. A. TypeA2 1.0.16 W.0.11 D.0.02m Empolion 1.0.07 W.0.05 D.001m i

VIL.10.6 Classical-Hellenistic Enclosure Sarcophagi Lids - Type B N. 81-Z Socket centrally placed on plinth (Fig. 203) with inscription on lid slope (VIL11.2). Plinth 1.0.4 W. 0.53 m. A. TypeB2 L.045 W.039 D.0.05m N. 83-BH Socket A original judging by symmetrical position on central plinth. Socket B is smaller and cut deeper (Figs. 181, 305). Plinth 0.80, 0.61 m. A. TypeBl L.026 W.021 D.0.03m B. TypeBl L.024 W.021 D.0.11m » Artifacts Catalogue Fig. 390 nos. 1040,1045; Beschi (1972), 142 Fig. 2.

522

δι N. 83-BJ Socket B original, subsequently altered by cutting of Sockets A and C into it (Figs. 181, 257) Plinth 0.90, 0.74 m. A. TypeBl 1.0.20 W.008 D.0.03m B. TypeB3 L.029 W.021 D.005m C. TypeB3 L.031 W.0.17 D.0.07m iv N.8LP Socket A centrally placed (Fig. 202). Plinth L. 0.72 W. 0.67 m. A. TypeB2 1.026 W.017 D.0.05m v N.SL-HH Socket A original, centrally placed, nearly obliterated by Socket B; Socket C on its own (Figs. 206, 257). Plinth L. 0.58 W. 0.40 m. A. TypeBl L.018 W.009 D.004m B. TypeB2 1.033 W.019 D.0.10m C. TypeB4 1.027 W.0.055 Ὁ. 005 m vi. N.8LJJ Socket A cut symmetrically on half plinth (Figs. 195, 305). Plinth L. 0.72 W. 0.21 m to ridge. A. TypeB3 1.050. W.020 Ὁ. 0.11πὶ vii N. 81-AI Socket A centrally placed (Figs. 206, 304). Inscription on lid slope (VII.11.2). Plinth L. 0.43 W.0.48 m. A. TypeB3 1.032 W.014 D.008m VIL10.7 Classical-Hellenistic Enclosure Sarcophagi Lids - Type C

i N.8212 Plinth now under spoilheap (Fig. 195).* A. TypeC iN. 8100 Rectangular sockets on ridge 040m from either side of plinth (Fig. 203). Plinth L. 0.44 W. 0.55 m. A. TypeC 1.007 W.0005 D.008m B. TypeC L.007 W.003 D.008m ü N. 81-DD Rectangular, wedge-shaped sockets on lid slope on south-east side 0.020 and 0.010 m from plinth corners (Fig. 203). Plinth L. 0.50 W. 0.44 m. A. TypeC 1.0.07 W.0.03 D.0.07m B. TypeC 1.0.07 W.0.03 D.007m iv N. 8.00 Socket A wedge-shaped, Socket B square-shaped bottom, Socket C partially obliterated, probably as Socket B (Fig. 203).” Plinth L. 0.48 W. 0.42 m. A. TypeC L.0.11 W.0.04 Ὁ. 0.04πὶ B. TypeC 1.014. W.004 D.004m C. TypeC obliterated

VII.10.8 Classical-Hellenistic Enclosure Sarcophagi Lids - Type D i N.8LY Rounded socket with rounded bottom (Fig. 203). Plinth L. 0.52 W. 0.45 m. A. TypeD Dia01] D.0.12m ü N. 81:85 Rounded socket off-centre (Fig. 203). Plinth L. 0.46 W. 0.43 m. A. TypeD 1.0.09 W.005 D.0.06m iü N. 81-AH Sockets A and E seem to belong to one feature, the cluster of three cone-shaped Sockets B, C. and D to another (Fig. 206). Plinth L. 0.50 W. 0.43 m. A. TypeD 1.0.06 W.004 Ὁ. 0.04 πὶ B. TypeD Dia.0.05 D.004m = Rowe Il, 9 Fig. XII. ? Rowe I, 8 Fig. XIII

523 C.

TypeD

D. TypeD E. TypeD

Dia0.05

Dia.0.05 L.006

D.0.04m

D.004m W.004 D.0.04m

VILLLO Sarcophagus Inscriptions

Only one example of a block-cut sarcophagus had an inscription along the case side (VILIL1). They are generally found on the lid slope, but in one instance on the lid edge (VIL.112.3). The following readings were given by Dr Joyce Reynolds. ΨΠ.11.1 Block-cut Sarcophagus Case

i N. 197, block-cut case above Loc.1, inscription on east face probably concealed by tomb entablature.® Inscription incomplete, L. 1.70 m. V-shaped cuts, very rough, uneven letters (Figs. 116, 304).

Greek c. 300 B.C.

LettersH. 0.090 - 0.260m.

AZAAAYIATIM Note: John Cassels recorded only the latter part in his notebook as AYTEMH

ΨΠ.11.2 Enclosure Sarcophagi Lids - Type B. i

N. 8LZ Lid with socketed plinth, inscription now (26 Sept 1989) weathered off west side of slope, south end," 1, 0.021 m; artifacts (Fig. 203). Greek cent B.C. Letters H. 0.080 m approx. ἸΣΑΣΙ

ü N. 81-AA Lid with plinth, two-line inscription on north side of slope, west end," L. 0.160 and 0.150 m; artifacts (Fig. 203). Greek iv cent B.C. ΛΎΣΙΣΙΣ

Ὁ ΦΙΛΟΙΚΩΜΩΚ

Letters H. 0.065-0,105 m. ? Lysis

(son) of Philokomos (aged) 20

ü N. 81-TT Lid with plinth, inscription on west side of slope,” L. 0.160 m; artifacts (Fig. 203). Greek iv cent B.C. Letters H. 0.080 - 0.100 m. TATIAZ ? Tatias

© “ © ®

Rowe1,22 Fig. X. Fairman Arch. Rowe Pb. 131; Rowe II, 8 Figs. XIII, XIV PL. 3c Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 133; Rowe Π 8 Pl. 21a. Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 181; Rowe II, 8 PL 21b.

524

iv N. I-II Lid with plinth, inscription now damaged (26 Sept 1989) on west side of slope, L. 0.169 m; artifacts (Figs. 206, 305). Greek iv cent B.C. Letters H. 0.180 m. KA[PITAIMEN(H2) Calrltaimen(es) v N. 81-AI Lid with socketed plinth, inscription on west side of slope, L. 0.42 m; artifacts (Figs. 206, 304). Greek iiii/ii cent B.C. LettersH. 0.150m. AIAQXOX ? Aidochos vi. N.81-(a) Lid with plinth, inscription on west side of slope, L. 0.550 m (Fig. 206). Greek cent B.C. Letters H. 0.110 - 0.140m. HPAIIX ? Heraiis

VIL11.3 Sarcophagus Group Lid - Type B. i

N. 83-BS Lid without plinth, weathered incomplete inscription on edge at north-west corner; artifacts (Fig. 188).

Greek iv cent B.C. AAALJONI

Letters H. 0.090 m

BURIAL PRACTICES VIL12.0 Tomb Inhumations

This deals primarily with burials in rock-cut tombs. Archaic chambered tombs are mainly unfurnished, except for klinai, and the inhumations are lost (VII.12.1-3). The theke beside Tomb N. 5 may represent the origin of more developed examples of loculi which were commonly used in arrangements of facade, antechamber and chamber loculi (VIL.12.4-6). Engaged sarcophagi around the walls of chambers with inhumations and artifacts occur in Tomb N. 81-A and were also intended for Tomb N. 81-0, where the alternative of a floor grave was eventually cut (VII.12.7). In the Late Roman period arcosolia and formae came into use, also the built grave of Demetria (VII.12.8-10). Semitic burial practice may be represented by ossuary niches (VII.12.11).

VIL.12.1 Archaic Doric Chamber Tombs (Fig. 298)

i

N.6 Chamber floor without burial features (Fig. 75). Others: N. 5, 7, 9 later alterations (Fig. 299). ü N. 5 Theke raised above floor of portico by 0.45 m (Figs. 75, 290). H. 0.92 L. 2.70 W. 0.75 m.

^ © “ ©

Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 214; Rowe II,8 Pl. 18c. Rowe Il, 9 Figs. XIII, XIV. Rowe Π 9 Fairman Arch, Rowe Ph. 90; RoweII Fig. XIV Pl. 22a,

VIL12.2 Aeolic Chamber Tombs

1 N.2 Chamber floor unaltered by burial features (Fig. 76). ü N. 3 Quadruple engaged klinai cut around chamber (Figs. 76, 295). Other: N. 4. VIL12.3 Archaic Ionic Chamber Tomb

i N. 8 Chamber floor extensively altered, originally with individual engaged klinai destroyed by later formae and arcosolia (Figs. 74, 79).

VII12.4 Classical-Hellenistic Fagade Loculi Tombs

i N. 197 Locs.1-3 double-level (Fig. 116). Loc.1 L. 4.28 upper levelH. 1.25 W. 1.13, lower level H. 0.98 W. 0.90; Loc. 2 L. 5.06 upper level H. 1.52 W. 1.14, lower level H. 1.30 W. 0.96; Loc. 3 L. 4.26 upper. level H. 1.30 W. 1.08, lower level H. 0.91 W. 0.86. ii N.13 Loc. double-level each H. 1.14. Upper level L. 2.26 W. 1.02 reduces to L. 2.16 W. 0.86 in lower level. Sill for separator slab 0.19m above entrance threshold is unusual. Loc. 2 vessel niches at end, H. unknown L. 2.90 W. 0.85 m (Fig. 64) Other: N. 34 L. 2.50 W. 0.97 m.

ii N. 83-BF Locs. 1-4. All four loculi show projecting chamfered sills 0.14 m below door sill to support separator slabs, now missing, which divide them into two equal levels. Loc.1 upper level shows droved edges around return of walls and ceiling, with three droved vertical lines at regular intervals down western side, a feature also noticed in Locs. 2 and 4 (Fig. 178). Loc3 is double-level, each level H. 1.35. Upper level L. 3.28 W. 1.04 reduces to W. 0.90 in lower level. Locs. 1-2 have similar dimensions and identical lengths. Loc. 4 upper level H. 1.30 L. 3.22 W. 1.05; lower level H. 1.13 W. 0.85 m has same arrangement as the others but is slightly shorter. VIL12.5 Classical-Hellenistic Wide Chamber Loculi Tombs (Fig. 298)

i

N. 10 Locs.1-5 single-level, later alterations with cineraria (Figs. 64, 261, 300). Loc. 1 H. 1.60 L. 2.92 W.0.91; Loc. 2 H. 1.60 L. 2.91 W. 0.90; Loc. 3 H. 1.60 L. 2.89W. 0.89; Loc. 4 H. 1.60 L. 2.87W. 0.89; Loc. 5 H. 1.60L. 2.82W. 0.90m. ii N.401 Loculus unfinished, mason's pin used (Fig. 101). H. 1.54 L. 1.00 W. 0.82 m. ii N. 83-BF bis Loc. 1 double-level, L. 3.07 W. 0.83; Loc. 2 single-level in early stages of cutting, with blocks being removed L. 2.72 W. 1.00 m (Fig. 178). VII.12.6 Classical-Hellenistic Rectangular Chamber Loculi Tombs

i

Copland Locs.1, 3-10 mainly double-level, with exception of Loc.2 which is triple-level (Fig. 61). Loc. 1 L. 2.80; Loc. 2 L. 4.30; Loc. 3 L. 5.35; Loc. 4 L. 4.05; Loc. 5 partially cutL. 1.00; Loc. 6 L. 2.20; Loc. 7 L, 2.23; Loc. 8 L. 4.94; Loc. 9 L. 5.90; Loc. 10 L. 5.60m. di N.83 bis Locs.1-3 single-level (Fig. 174). Loc. 1 L. 2.32 W. 1.18; Loc. 2 L. 220 W. 1.20; Loc. 3 L. 2.64 W.120m.

526

VIL.12.7 Classical-Hellenistic Sarcophagus Chamber Tombs (Fig. 298) iN. BLA Wall sarcophagus d Rock-cut in body of chamber above floor level. Lid fitting cover slabs (Fig. 198). Slabs L. 1.28 W. 0.62 Th. 020, Case H. 0.72 Th. 0.23, interior L. 2.55 W. 0.92 D. 1.25 m. Others: N. 81, N. 81-A sarcophagi e, fg N. 81-0 Cut into floor, slabs resting on floor surface with notch in western wall. (Fig, 198).” GraveL. 1.69 W. 0.68D. 0.82 m Slab L. 0.80W. 0.30 now surviving

formed of four close L. 256 W. 134 wall Five cover slabs, one Th. 0.19 m.

Others: N. 9, N. 7 portico, N. 5 Grave 6, N. 401

VIL12.8 Roman Cubiculum Arcosolia (Fig. 299)

i N. 241 Arcosolium 4 Case shows bevelled base and rim with three swags enclosing small human heads and supported by two bucrania; mensa missing. Inside case rim on each long side are three rebated open sockets with a headrest at western end. Undecorated niche encloses case, above which is the conch showing sculpted shell with thirty flutes (Figs. 59-60). CaseH. 0.92 L. 2.30 W. 1.44, interior L. 2.05 W. 1.11 D. 0.77 Rebated sockets L. 0.18 W. 0.08; L. 0.10 W. 0.06; L. 0.095 W. 0.06; D. 0.90 Headrest L. 0.06 Niche H. 2.72 L. 230 Shell H. 1.36 W. 1.85 m. ii N. 83 Arcosolium 8 Case complete before 1938; when surveyed by Rowe in 1956 case wall had virtually disappeared, but had been in appearance the same as iv. No evidence for rebated sockets inside case rim as noticed in i. Floor of grave has been cut to form another, later grave. Undecorated niche encloses case, above which is the conch showing sculpted shell with thirty-two flutes (Fig. 173). TL. 107 L. 2.43 W. 2.24 Th. 0.10, interior L. 2.40 W. 0.99 D. 0.54, lower grave L. 1.62 W. 0.79 D. 0.58 Case Niche H. 3.28 L. 2.24 Shell H. 1.15 L. 2.00 m. ii N. 241 Arcosolium 7 as i, without relief decoration on case or conch but with painted decoration throughout, imprint of mensa Th. 0.14 πὶ and headrest at western end (Figs. 60, 293). Case H. 0.82 L. 2.22 W. 0.96 interior L. 1.93 W. 0.72 D. 0.66 m. iv N. 83 Arcosolium 6 as i but smaller, case complete and has bevelled base and rim with raised rectangu lar panel (Fig. 173).” Case H. 1.06 L. 2.24 W. 1.20 interior L. 1.94 W. 0.81 D. 0.65 Niche H. 3.25 L. 242 Shell H. 1.12 L. 2.00 m. Other: N. 83 Arcosolium 11

v N. 241 Arcosolium 2 as i and iti but undecorated, and stilted barrel vault instead of conch (Fig. 60). Case H. 0.81 L. 2.02 W. 1.01, interior L. 1.93 W. 0.74 D. 0.63 Barrel vault H. 1.63 m, L. 2.02 m. Others: N. 241 Arcosolia 3, 5, 6 and 7 with a headrest. vi N. 83 Arcosolium 12 as il, without relief decoration on case or conch but with painted decoration throughout and imprint of mensa Th, 0.19 m (Figs. 173, 294). Case H. 0,99 L. 2.24 W. 1.33, interior L. 2.10 W. 0.85 D. 0.69 m. vii N. 82 Arcosolium A as v, completely plain (Fig. 191).” Case H. 0.33 L. 2.28 W. 1.23m, barrel-vaulted H. 1.55 to case, interiorL, 1.96 W. 0.91 D. 0.66 m.

Other: N. 82 Arcosolium B, N. 5 Arcosolia 1-2 vii N, 241 Intended barrel-vaulted arcosolium recess, traced semi-circular outline Dia. 1.70 m above Forma 1, no case required for this type (Fig. 60). ix N. 8 Square-headed arcosolium recesses 3-4, cases combined with divider between W. 0.20 m to form © © 7? > ® ?

Rowe Il Fig. X. Rowe TI Fig, XIV. Cassels (1955)PL Via, Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 13; Rowe ITP. 15b. Fairman Arch, Rowe Pb. 14; RoweII Pl. 15c. Rowe II Fig. XIV inset, Pl. 41c.

527

recesses H. 1.32 from case rim to ceilingD. 1.30m cut with mason’s pin. Cover slabs missing (Fig. 74). Recess 3 case H. 0.65 L. 1.68 W. 0.91, wall Th. 0.19, interior L. 1.58 W. 0.62 D. 0.40; Recess 4 case H. 0.64 L. 1.60 W. 0.90, wall Th.0.17, interior L. 1.63 W. 0.60D. 0.46 m.

VIIL.12.9 Roman Cubiculum Formae (Fig. 299)

i N. 5 Forma 4 Well-dressed interior; rebated surround suggests use of single slab flush with floor (Fig. 75). Forma L. 2.45 W.

1.30 Interior L. 2.08 W. 0.96 D. 1.42 Rebated surround W. 0.18 D. 0.21 m.

Other: N. 5 Formae 3,5 üi N. 241 Forma 1 against arcosolium step with rebated offset, cover slabs missing but top probably level with floor (Fig. 60). Forma interior L. 1.85 W. 0.61 D. -. RebateW. 0.14 D. 0.08 m. Other: N. 241 Forma 8; N. 83 Forma 3 ii N. 83 Forma 13 below Loc. 2 cut with mason’s pin, surviving slab in situ now incomplete, underside smooth, top surface covered by layer of mortar Th. 0.01-0.05 m identical to that used for murals in Arcosolium 12 (Figs. 172-174). Forma interior L. 2.23 W. 0.80 D. 0.77 Slab L. 0.64 W. 0.87 Th. 0.23 m. Other: N. 5 Forma 6; N. 6; N. 7; N. 8 Formae 1-2, 5-6; N. 9; N. 401 ἵν΄ N. 83 raised Grave 10 behind cinerarium N. 83 recess 9 probably served as a forma (Figs. 172, 238) Case H. 0.34 L. 1.78 W. 0.80 Th. 0.20 D. 0.58 m.

VII.12.10 Roman Ashlar-built Grave (Fig. 299)

iN, 83 Grave 4, Rowe’s Grave GI. Built grave of Demetria of a white fossil-free calcareous stone (Fig. 173). Lower part of wall has suffered badly from spalling. Northern corner shows return of arcosolium step H. 0.22 W. 0.39 m, previously removed by mason’s pin when earlier Forma 3 was cut in floor, marks of which can be traced along wall face to entrance steps. Later Grave4 is ashlar-built on floor of cubiculum without mortar being used, now only one course surviving; finely dressed with claw chisel and shows ends of two of the ashlar blocks trimmed down by mason’s pin to fit available space, indicating that the blocks were reused. In cubiculum north wall is roughly chiselled horizontal notch 1.37m above floor to receive and support mensa slab, implying that built grave was originally four courses high, incorporating arcosolium step, the courses abutting case of Arcosolium 5. In 1861 the grave was shown by Porcher complete, except for the mensa? which was, however, recorded on his plan. The last line of the Demetria inscription IIb (VIL4.3) is 1.31m above the notch, the third line at eye level if one could stand on the mensa, Exterior H. 0.34 L. 2.88 W. 1.35, interior L. 2.88 W. L. 1.45 W. 0.55 D. -, rebateW. 0.12 D. 0.20m.

0.82 D.

0.34 Notch H.

0.11 L. 2.88 Forma 3

Ashlar blocks of the same size and material used for the Demetria grave occur above Hellenistic Grave N. 83-O and Tomb N, 82 Grave 4. The most suitable origin for the reused material would be the north-east corner of Tomb N. 83 forecourt N. 83-Z, which contains identical ashlar, as listed below.

# Rowe Π Fig. VIII » Smith and Porcher (1864) Pl. 31; Bacchielli (19934), 98-99 Fig. 24,

528

Comparative Ashlar Sizes Location

Height

Length

Thickness

N.83Grave4

0.34 0.34 0.34

115 0.94 0.32

052 052 0.52

N.82 Grave C.

Grave N. 83-0

0.32 0.29

0.93 124

0.50 0.52

N. 83 Boundary NE corner West

Height

Length

Thickness

038 0.38 0.38

1.06 0.80 0.80

050 0.50 0.50

0.25 0.22

1.20 0.86

0.52 0.44

d N82 Grave C Same construction and materials as i, two courses surviving, one side incorporating arcosolium step, over which is a horizontal notch 0.84 m above floor to receive and support mensa slab (Fig. 191).* Grave H. 0.73 L. 2.63 W. 1.73, interior L. 2.18 W. 0.86 D. 0.72 m.

Other: N. 82 Grave D ji N.83-O Grave built on floor of extended Enclosure N. 83-Z on one course surviving between enclosure wall and Sarcophagus Type Β115 placed on Enclosure N. 83-S boundary line forms 122m above floor in side of slab implies that an upper three H. 0.59 L. 2.16

site of lower Hellenistic rock-cut grave, N. 83-Q; large reused sarcophagus lid one side (Figs. 172, 301). A notch cut courses once existed. Sarcophagus lid

W. 1.08 m.

VIL12.11 Roman Ossuary Niches (Fig. 300)

N.401 Barrel-vaulted conch cut with mason's pin with fat sill, rebated front for vertical slab now missing (Fig. 101). Recess H. 0.96 L. 0.68 D. 0.60 Rebated front W. 0.15 D. 0.15 m. ü N.2 portico, rectangular niche cut into wall on western side (Figs. 76, 262). H. 0.63 L. 0.84 D. 0.60 m. Others: N. 2 portico eastern side H. 0.30 L. 0.40 D. 0.28; N. 4 chamber southern side H. 0.39 L. 0.51 D. 0.29; western side H. 0.32 L. 0.48 D. 0.28; N. 5 portico eastern side H. 0.45 L. 0.70 D. 40m i

VII.13.0 Tomb and Enclosure Cremations

Vessel niches for amphorae and hydriai cut in loculi tombs appear to be seconday (VII.13.1). In the Roman period cremation is much broader, with primary niches in cubiculum tombs (VIL13.2) and in loculus tombs occur secondary examples (VII.13.3). Alternative cremation practices involve small block- and rock-cut caskets (VIL.16.4; VII.17.5) and an enchytrismos (111.21.2). VIL13.1 Classical-Hellenistic Vessel Cremation Niches (Fig. 300) i N. 10 Loc. 3:1 Vessel niche, roughly cut silhouette of tall cremation amphora (Figs. 64, 261). NicheH. 0.80W. 0.16, 0.40, 0.13 D. 0.18m. Others: N. 10 Loc. 3:2 H. 0.81 W. 0.23, 0.41, 0.10D. 0.15, N. 13 Loc.2D. 0.48 m.

ü N. 197 Loc.3 Vessel niche resembling hydria silhouette, base truncated by later cover slab, may have contained a large squat hydria with lid (Figs. 116-117). Vessel silhouette H. 0.57 W body.0.26, neck 0.14, rim 0.50, 0.42 Ὁ. 0.12 m.

™ RoweIl Fig. XIV insets

529 VIL13.2 Roman Cubiculum Cinerarium Niches (Fig. 300)

i N. 241 Niche 9 Round-headed, square-sided with rebated rim for slab (Figs. 59-60). NicheH. 0.83 L. 0.95 W. 0.60 Receptacle interior L. 0.77 W. 0.40D. 0.33 Rebated rim W. 0.04 D. 0.04 m Other: N. 241 Niche 10 ii_N, 83 Niche 7 Opening combines an inserted lintel, now missing, probably showing cymatium (Fig. 173). Niche back above and behind receptacle has lining of plaster Th. 0.002 m, painted black. Receptacle square, straight-sided with small cover slab showing projecting rim moulding Th.0.15m. Niche H. 1.57 L. 1.08 W. Th. 0.24 m. Other: N. 83 Niche 9

1.75 Receptacle

interior L.

0.80 W.

0.43

D. 0.30 Lintel H. 035

L.

1.20

VIL13.3 Roman Cinerarium Niches (Fig. 300)

i N.10 Loc. 2 Round-headed niche with conch, rectangular receptacle with rounded sides and sill with evidence for cover slab (Figs. 6,64). NicheH. 0.63 L. 0.47 W. 0.44 Receptacle interior L. 0.40 W. 0.33 D. 0.17 m. Other: N. 10 Loc. 1 Niche H. 0.55 L. 0.44 W. 0.29 Receptacle interior L. 0.41 W. 0.23 D. 0.07 m.

ΠΝ. 197 Loc.3 Square-headed niche with conch, niche similar to i above, but adapted earlier vessel niche for the purpose. Square-headed cinerarium niche, around exterior a series of drilled holes, suitable for mounting a metallic or wooden closure. Interior barrel-vaulted, large deep receptacle, evidence of deep notch for cover slab (Fig. 117). Niche H. 0.69 W. 0.68 D. 0.42 Receptacle interiorL. 0.66 W. 0.44 D. 0.38 m.

VII.14.0 Rock-cut Grave Inhumations

These were named ‘slot graves’ by Rowe and are rock-cut, covered by a single slab. They ‘occur as two scattered groups over the hillslope, orientated in various directions (VIL14.1-2). The orientation on 23 September 1994 was 110° which is compatible with the alignment of the Lower Group, implying that the graves may have been cut either in the spring or autumn if the solar axis was adopted when burial took place (Fig. 302). Two graves appear in the extended forecourt of Tomb N. 83, identical in construction to Late Roman formae (VII.12.8; VIL.14.3) and small cremation burials occur, possibly for young infants (VIL.14.4). VIL14.1 Rock-cut Graves - Upper Group (Fig. 301) 1

Grave N. 83-A Cut into bedrock with mason’s pin, finely dressed horizontal border around rim at southern and western sides where it is terraced into hillside, no surviving slab (Figs. 166, 179). Interior shows rounded bolster cut at western end, a feature also noticed in Grave N. 83-E. Border W. 0.14 Ῥ.. 0.30 Interior L. 1.74W. 058 D. 0.48 m. Orientation of Graves N.83-A = 91 Ν.838 = 32 N.83-E = 95 N.83-F = 110

N.83-C Ν.83.Ζ

80° 3°

Ν. 83-D =28" Ν. 82:20 = 160°

530

VIL14.2 Rock-cut Graves - Lower Group i

Grave N. 83-AI Part of slab lid remains, showing original weathered surface on top (Figs. 166, 180). Lid surviving L. 1.48 W. 0.90 Th. 0.32 BorderW. 0.20 Interior L. 1.70 W. 0.55 D. 0.38 m.

Orientation of Graves N.83-A] = 105° 11% 118 — N.83-AS = 130° N.83-AZ = 9» 118 Others: N.83-AG, AH, AO, N. 81-A facade two

N.83-AK = 120° N.83-ATuntraced N.83-BEuntraced truncated examples.

N.83-AM = 120° Ν. 83-AU = 108° Ν.823 = 90°

VII.14.3 Facade Loculus Tomb Forecourt Graves (Fig. 301)

iN. 83 Lower Grave N. 83-O Remains of single slab flush with forecourt floor with rebated surround to support it, final dressing done with claw chisel. A later upper built grave covers this (Fig. 172). InteriorL. 1.31 W. 0.51 D. 0.42, rebateW. 0.12 D. 0.14 m. ü N.83 Grave N. 83-T Cover slab missing, but rested on floor of tomb forecourt, Interior finely dressed with claw chisel (Fig. 172). Interior L. 1.70W. 059 D. 0.42 m. VIL15.0 Orthostat-built Cists and Isodomie-built

The slab construction cist grave in Tomb E.174 is the only example to come from a large burial plot (VIL15.1). Those in Tomb 5.77 cup 1 and 2 have a orthostat construction, but the latter also has isodomic work (VII.15.2). The later inserted isodomic built chamber of Tomb 5.81, which in turn resembles the main burial chamber in Tomb E.161 with a tumulus above (VIL153). VIL15.1 Slab-buil

Cists (Fig. 301)

iE, 174 Cist 2 Cover slabs missing. Slab-built, single level, single slab each side (Figs. 148-149). Cist L. 2.02 W. 1.27, interior L. 1.62 W. 0.67 D. 0.70 m. VIL.15.2 Orthostat-built Chambers (Fig. 301)

i 8.77 cape 1 Four cover slabs in situ. Upper cist consists of orthostats built just above the natural rock surface, with the end orthostats rebated by 0,02m to receive side orthostats. North-east corner constructed of two ashlar blocks instead, which is the same construction as used in i . Top of orthostats show an anathyrosis, interior surface dressed with a drove chisel in vertical lines. Lower cist rock-cut with an offset running round all four sides, and on one side a thin course of ashlar (Figs. 162-163). Upper cist L. 3.25 W. 1.63, interior L. 2.66 W. 0.99 D. 1.15, upper cover slabs L. 1.63 W. 0.78 Th. 036, orthostat H. 1.14 L. 1.36 Th.0.34 m. Lower eist offset W. 0.07, 0.14 interior L. 2.38 W. 0.84 D. 1.00, lower cover slabs L. 0.99W. 0.60 Th. 0.15m. ii 8. 77 CHbR 2 Three cover slabs in situ. Upper cist construction as i (Figs. 161-163). Upper cist L. 2.96 W. 1.85, interior L. 2.36 W. 1.22 D. 1.22, upper cover slabs L. 1.82 W. 0.68 Th.036, side slabs H. 0.57 1.1.15 Th030 m. Lower cist offset W. 0.10, interior L. 2.16W. 1.02, side slabsH. 0.60L. - Th.

531 VIL15.3 Isodomic-built Chambers (Fig. 301)

i

$.81 Cover slabs missing. Isodomic built, upper two courses exposed, Probably at two levels, the lower one infilled later with stones (Figs. 150, 154, 249). Exterior L. 2.83 W. 1.73, interior L. 1.95 W. 0.85 D. 0.84 exposed, ashlar H. 0.42 L. 0.90 W. 0.44 m. d E. 161 Rowe's Main Burial Chamber. Three broken cover slabs; cist similar to i in construction and size of ashlar (Figs. 129, 135-136). Interior H. 1.06 L. 2.64 W. 132 m approx.

VIL16.0 Block-cut Sarcophagi

Blocks of limestone were separated from the rockface to form free-standing sarcophagi cases, which could then be transported to their intended positions. An unfinished example is a roughly-dressed case (VIL16.1). Inhumation examples of Type B sarcophagi are those in Tomb 5.77 with lids showing no central plinth, which is unusual, comparable only with rock-cut Sarcophagus N. 81-X and a smaller example N. 83-BO (VII.16.2). An exceptional sarcophagus in Tomb E.

19 compartment shows a low ridged lid with no acroteria (VII.16.3). Cremation exam-

ples are smaller and seem to have a more distinctive chest-like form (VIL.16.4). Comparative examples of Types A and B are known elsewhere in Cyrene, including imported marble Type C sarcophagi. VIL16.1 Drafted Lid (Fig. 304)

i. N.34 Type D. III Unfinished drafted lid, not separated from bedrock of boundary wall, cut on its side behind balustrade. Central horizontal fillet running along its length (Fig. 101). Slab H. 1.85 W. 0.60 Th.0.22, fillet H. 0.03W. 0.04m.

ü N. 197 Lid missing, case roughly cut with mason's pin in diagonal fashion, inscription on side (Figs. 116, 246). Case H. 0.56 L. 2.70 W. - Th.0.20 m.

VIL 162 Broad Sarcophagus i

8. 77.3 Type C.IL3 broad. Lid complete identical to that from rock-cut sarcophagus N. 81exposed case well-dressed (Figs. 163, 203). Lid H. 0.40 L. 2.64 W. 1.32, case Th.0.20, interior W.0.92 D- m. Others: S. 77.4, 8.77.5

VIL.16.3 Narrow Sarcophagus iE, 19 Type CIL3 narrow. Lid shows low ridge with slightly raised square pads at corners, case thinwalled, the whole well-dressed (Figs. 142-144). Lid incomplete, W. 09m. Case estimated H. 1.15 L. 2.20 ‘W. 0.90 m, interior inaccessible.

532

VIE.16.4 Casket Sarcophagi i N. 834 Casket sarcophagus, lid missing, case well-dressed, interior straight-sided, rough bottom, cut with mason’s pin (Fig. 179). Case H. 0.58 L. 0.98 W. 0.66, interior D. 0.26 L. 0.73 W. 0.35 m. Others: N. 9 (Figs. 68-70); N. 57 Case H. 0.50 L. 0.90 W. 0.50; N. 83-V Case H. 0.32 exposed, L. W. 0.54;N. 198A (Fig. 113) Case H. 0.62 L. 1.00W. 0.74 m.

1.00

VILI7.0 Rock-cut Sarcophagi (Fig. 303) The loculus sarcophagus N. 81-UU is unusual by having an entrance at the end of the case (VIL17.1). Rectangular blanks for cases are sometimes found in enclosures as demonstrated by Enclosure N. 83-BK and again by N. 81-AN, where Sarcophagus N. 81-QQ shows the case in the early stages of quarrying, with the drafted lid placed on top. Completed lids were primarily lifted by means of square bosses at either end which, to prevent space between sarcophagi being restricted, were removed after the lid had been placed on the case, and replaced by semi-circular holes for subsequent shifting by leverage (VII.17.2). Most sarcophagi lids show a plain central plinth astride the ridge, which was often a focal point for statuary and stelai on the evidence of the sockets (VII.10.0). The cases are in five roughly graduated sizes, Types A-E, which can be further subdivided into broad and narrow examples based on the division of the length by the width. Types A-B are more commonly broad (VIL17.3). The most common example of this variation in width is Type C, numerous narrow examples of which appear in Enclosures N. 81-BB, KK and AB (Figs. 203, 206). The smaller inhumation sarcophagus is the uncommon Type D (VIL.17.4), but the smallest examples, Type E, contain cremation burials (VII.17.5). Little is known of the purpose of the false sarcophagi, which fall into the latter two types (VIL.17.6). Comparative examples of the morphology of other sarcophagi which relate to those revealed by Rowe are included later (Figs. 251-252), while the most definitive examples of archacologically excavated sarcophagi, illustrating their size and burial practice, arc outlined fully below. Sarcophagus Type A (exceptionally large) N.8LUU Ν. 85:81 N.83-B] Type B. (large common size) N.83-BH N.83-BG Cyrene A Type C (small common size) Cyrene B N.81-Q Type D (smaller) N.83-BO ‘Type E (smallest) N.8LAC N.81-AD

Metres

Burial

345x140 339x139 338x145

1inbumation 5 inhumations

2.63 x1.23 2.63 x 1.23 (2.62 1.15)

3 inhumations 4 inhumations 2 inhumations

(2.13 x 098) 205x112

1inhumation

158x062

(inhumation)

1.24 x 0.67

cremation

0.97 x 0.57

cremation

533 ‘The lid configurations to these cases differ, and have been defined in the following order. I 11 12 13 14 15

‘Type without acroteria Tabular slab Slopes on one side only Ridged As L2 but with projecting central plinth Slopes on both sides with central plinth

II

As series but with acroteria

THO

Variants

VILIT.1 Loculus Sarcophagi (Fig. 304) i

N. 81-UU Type AIL: lid complete with central plinth showing sockets and lever holes at western end, case with entrance at eastern end, interior still filled with hillwash (Figs. 200, 257). Lid H. 0.86 L. 3.45 W. 145

Case H. 1.17 L. 3.30 W. 1.55 Entrance opening H. 1.26 W. 0.89 D. 0.32 m.

Other: N. 17 forecourt Lid H. 0.80 L. 3.00 W. 1.53m” N. 197 forecourt Type C.IL5: possibly orthostat-built above low rock-cut wall, north-western side representing entrance, upper level open with separator slabs, one missing, in situ for lower level grave, according to Rowe covered by thick layer of plaster, surmounted by large rectangular block of stone, probably original door. Outside surround shows quarryman’s channelling slot (Fig. 116).” H.052 L. 2.07 W. 1.08, interior L. 1.90 W. 0.72 m. Lower grave inaccessible.

VII.17.2 Drafted Sarcophagi (Figs. 304-305)

N.81-QQ Type B.IL1 broad: Sarcophagus blank abandoned in early stages of cutting the case, showing outline of deep quarryman's channelling slot W. 0.10 D. 0.44 defining limits of interior; drafted tabular lid, now broken, covers case (Fig. 195). Lid L. 2.40 W. 1.20 Tb.0,60 Case H. 0.81 L. 240 W. 1.20 m. ü N. 81-M Type B.IL5 broad: D-shaped lever hole at eastern end, plain plinth (Fig. 202). Lid H. 0.59 1.247 W. 1.20 Lever hole H. 0.15 L. 0.21 D. 0.10 Case H. 0.21, L. 35 L. 248 W. 1.24 m. iii N. 81-AI Type C.IL5 narrow: Boss at either end with D-shaped lever hole at eastern end, rectangular socket on plinth (Fig. 206). Lid H. 0.50 L. 226 W. 0.95 Bosses 0.25 m sq. Lever hole H. 0.06 L. 0.16 D. 0.06 Case H. 058 L. 2.40W. 0.95m.

VIL.17.3 Broad Sarcophagi i

N. 83-BI Type AILS broad: Low sarcophagus case with oversized lid overhanging case at northern end (Fig. 183); shows lever hole only at this end (Fig. 181). Lid H. 0.80 L. 3.38 W. 1.39 Case H. 0.17 L. 3.29 W. 1.60 InteriorL. 259W. 0.89 D. 1.04 m. Other: N. 83-BJ Lid H. 0.78 L. 336 W. 158 Case H. 040 L. 3.40 W. 1.70 Interior L. 2.62 W. 0.95 D. 1.05 m.

ii N. 83-H Type C.IL4 broad: Low sarcophagus case, variant with 0.22 m offset rim in front (Figs. 179, 258). LidH. 0.52L. 2.42 W. 1.12 CaseH. 0.75 L. 2.36 W. 1.08 m.

” Smith and Porcher (1864) Pl. 19.

?* RoweII Fig. VII section C-D.

» Rowe Il Fig. VII section C-D Pl. 3b. “ Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 142; Rowe ITP 21ς,

534

N. 81] Type B.IL4 broad: (Fig. 195). Lid H. 0.55 L. 257 W. 130 m. CaseH. 1.14 L. 2.60 W. 135 Step H. 0.24 W. 0.28m. iv N. 83:BH Type Β115 broad: Central plinth shows sockets for block stelai (Fig. 181). Lid H. 0.55 L. 2.51 W. 1.23 Case H. 1.58 L. 2.46W. 1.26 Interior L. 1.98 W. 0.76 D. 0.76 m.

Others: N. 83-BG, N. 198 (Rowe's N. 198A) v N. 81-Q Type CLS broad: Central plinth shows socket for anionic half-figure (Figs. 202, 255, 390) Lid.H. 0.51 L. 2.04 W. 1.12 Case H. 0.86 L. 2.15 W. 1.15 Interior D. 0.69 m. vi N. 81-C Type (15 broad: Central acroterion on enclosure side obliterated H. 0.480 W. 0.360 (Figs 202, 255). Lid H. 0.62 L. 2.20W. 1.20 Case H. 0.54 L. 2.26 W. 1.28 m.

vii N. 81-X Type C.IL3 broad: No plinth, D-shaped lever holes. Identical to lids of block sarcophagi in TombS. 77.3-4 (Fig. 203). LidH. 0.48 L. 2.24 W.

1.15 CaseH. 0.92 L. 2.23 W.

1.15 m.

VIL17.4 Narrow Sarcophagi (Fig. 305) iN. 83-BS Type C2 narrow: No plinth or acroteria, inscription (Fig. 188). Lid H. 0.36 L. 2.08 W. 0.80 CaseH. 0.44L. 2.09W. 0.82 InteriorL. 1.72 W. 0.53 D. 0.40 m. i N. 83-BP Type C.IL4 narrow: Plinth off-centre, rounded socket on top (Fig. 305). Series of six drilled holes Dia. 0.012 m on vertical face of lid (Fig. 206). Running measurements: 0.09, 0.42, 0.82, 1.22, gap, 2.14, end of slab is 2.22 m. Lid H. 0.40 L. 2.21 W. 0.80 m. Case inaccessible.

iii N. 8111 Type C.IL5 narrow: Inscribed (Fig. 206). Lid H. 0.47 L. 2.33 W. 0.95 Case H. 052 L. 2.33 W. 0.95 m.

iv N. 83-BO Type D. IL3 narrow: No plinth with acroteria (Fig. 188). Lid H. 0.40 L. 1.58 W. 0.62. Case H. 0.20. 158 W. 0.62. Interior L. 1.30 approx. W. 0.40 approx. D. 0.28 m.

VILI7.5 Casket Sarcophagi i N. 83-BR Type E.ILS: Plinth with socket (Figs. 188, 297). Lid H. 034 L. 0.96 W. 0.63. Case H. 0.15 L.0.96 W. 0.62 m.

ü Ν. 81-ΑὉ Type E.IL5: Plinth with socket (Figs. 203, 297). Lid H. 0.15 L. 1.23 W. 0.66. Interior L. 1.02 W.038D.039m. τὰ N.SI-RR Type E.IL3: No plinth (Fig. 203). Lid H. 0.20 L. 0,87 W. 0.53 m. Case inaccessible. Other: N. IN. iv N. 81-AD Type E.IL2: Slope on one side, no plinth, flat area possibly for half-figure of Thea (Figs. 203, 255). Lid H. 0.18 L. 0.97 W. 0.57m. Case inaccessible. VIL.17.6 False Sarcophagi i Near Sarcophagus N. 81-T, Type D. IL4 narrow false sarcophagus H. 1.06 L. 1.85 W. 0.60 m was noticed, which may have been connected with a rock-cut grave (Fig. 206). ii West of Sarcophagus N. 81-T by rock outcrop, partly buried in situ (Fig. 206), Type E.IL4 narrow: Lid H. 0.28 L. 1.28 W. 0.52 Plinth L. 0.30 W. 0.23 m.

© Fairman Arch. Rowe Ph. 71; Rowe Il, 7 Pl. 11e.

335

VIL18.0 Votive Deposits

The discovery of small ducts cut in the floor of Enclosure N. 82-23, and a square cover near the rock-cut sarcophagi presents primary evidence of the funerary practices connected with inhumation burials (VII.18.1).

VIL18.1 Cremation Receptacle (Fig, 305) i N. 82:23 Western corner of enclosure floor by Sarcophagus N. 82-21 shows square cover which when

lifted showed drafted edge and central boss. Cist circular with square rebated surround, depth and contents unrecorded, probably a cremation, now covered by spoilheap (Fig. 193).

© Fairman Arch. Rowe Ps. 145-146; Rowe II, 9 Pls.19c-d.

536 LIST OF FIGURES CHAPTER VII — Catalogue of Burial Accoutrements

Architectural Elements Fig. 287 Archaic Doric columns from portico tombs Fig. 288 Aeolc pillars and Archaic Tonic columns from portico tombs Fig. 289 Acolic epistyles, Archaic Tonic entablatures and Classical-Hellenistic entablatures Fig. 290 Archaic Doric, Acolic and Archaic Ionic chamber entrances Fig. 291 Classical-Hellenistic facade loculus entrances Fig. 292 Classical-Hellenisticloculus entrances; shrine/temple tomb entrances; plain entrances Fig. 293 Roman cubiculum mural of the Good Shepherd Fig. 294 Roman cubiculum mural of the Winged Figures

Figs. 287-305, (vit) (vil123) (022,4) (VH3.13) (VILIA) (VIL3.5-10) (ILL) (a2)

Burial Forniture. Fig. 295 Acolic chamber and Classical Hellenistic enclosure klinai and tables Fig. 296 Classical-Hellenistichalf-figure niche; Roman funerary bust niches; sockets for marble inscription panels. Fig. 297 Classical-Hellenistic tomb and sarcophagus socket configurations

(VIL12; VIL6.12) (VIL7.1, 4-7) (VIL10.1-8)

Burial Practice Fig. 298 Archaic- and Classical-Hellenistictheke and loculus configurations; sarcophagus chamber tombs Fig. 299 Roman cubiculum arcosolia; Roman cubiculum formae and ashlar-built graves Fig. 300 Classical-Hellenistic vessel niches, Roman ossuarics, cineraria and niches Fig. 301 Orthostat- and isodomic built single and double level cist chambers, orthostat-built cist, rock-cut graves, forecourt graves Fig. 302 Solar orientation chart Fig. 303 Sarcophagus type chart Fig. 304 Block-cut sarcophagi, rock-cut loculus sarcophagus, drafted and low sarcophagi Fig. 305 Sarcophagi lids, casket and false sarcophagi, cremation receptacles

(111247) (VILI2.8-10) (WI.12.11, VIL.12) (VILI4.13; VILI.13) (IL14.1.2) (VL7.0) (VILI VILI7.13) (VILI 3-6 1.18.1)

537

Tomb NG

Fic. 287 -- Archaic Doric columns from portico tombs (VIL.1.D).

Mens, et del Jet D

538

‘Tomb N.4

Fic. 288 - Aeolic pillars and Archaic Ionic columns (VIL1.2-3).

539 Goo pisi € NquoL

LSUN quo

por esmaeN "€ ontg ΓΖ fPoy T (PT TILA) sosmiejqeauo OnsuSTPFI-[rOISSE7D pur sosiejqeiuo 5000] oppry 'sapasrdo orpooy -- 687 “OI

dE

SNquoL

540

€T €TIA) soouenuo zoqureqo 980 oteupay pur ojosy ‘HO ompry - 062 “HL

541

a [pp 2 so 13018 N quor

wi

“(eC TIA) soouenu» sn na] apedey SAsOTPLT- POISED - 162 "O1

T99/6UN quon,

542

Go pp suo Ore N quor,

(OI-€

LEN quo

2.501 quo] poro

T T'S -- zc "oi CTIA) sour» urejd fsa»uenzo quon o[dtuai unns fsooueaaue sn7R>0] onsruo[p

ISRUNuoL

543

Fic. 294 - Roman cubiculum mural of the Winged Figures (VIL4.2)

544

p. Uu ‘Tomb N. 1 enclosure

Mens εἰ ἀεὶ. Jet D.

Fic. 295 - Aeolic chamber and Classical-Hellenistic enclosure klinai and tables (VIL5.1-2; VIL6.1-2)

545

‘Mens.δε! Jer

Fic. 296-- Classical-Hellenistic half-figure niche; Roman funerary bust niches; sockets for marble inscription panels (VIL7.1, 4-7). 1. Window; 2, Cramps,

546

er

và ve

d

Ij

E

&

=

; Fin) BUT]

4 j 00 ei

After Rowe.

t

=

et del. J et D. Mens.

Fic. 297 - Classical-Hellenistic tomb and sarcophagus socket configurations (VII.10.1-8).

548

rzd

ete rer

‘TombN.241 Arcoclium 4

ny

cM up Mewerdd]eD

TombN.8 Arcovoliom8

Mens et del. Jet D

"δ ΒΡΩ͂ ὁ ‘Tomb N. 241 Forma 1

‘Tomb N.5 Forma 4

Tomb N. 83 Forma 13

Tomb N.83 Graved

[m

Mens et de. JerD

Fic. 299 — Roman cubiculum arcosolia; Roman cubiculum formae and ashlar-buile graves (VIIL12.8-10). 1. Outline of grave; 2. Outline of upper grave; 3. Outline of lower grave; 4. Slots 5. Notch.

549

ae [pp ena 29116 N quor.

(CT EVTIA "ITZETIA) 4p EH pur egressu 'sagrensso urwoy ‘SOyDIE [ossoa ORSFLSTOFI-TPOISSET — OOE “KA

zo9]0UNquoL

550

‘Tomb E. 161 Main Tomb

Tomb S.81 Cis

Mens et del. JD.

Fic. 301 - Orthostat- and isodomic-built single and double level cist chambers, orthostat-built cist, rock-cut graves, forecourt graves (VII.14.1,3;VIL15.1-3).

551

23ed September 194

Nh bo.

Fic. 302 - Solar orientation chart (VIL.14.1-2)

Fic. 303 - Sarcophagus type chart (VIL7.0).

OB set

552

Fic. 304 — Block-cut sarcophagi, rock-cut loculus sarcophagus, drafted and low sarcophagi (VIL16.1-4; VIL17.13), 1. Block.

553

Note not to scale. Nese Sarcophagus Mens. et del Jet

BUT

.

ur Rocky outcrop

Enclosure N. 82.23 After Rowe I ls. ed

Fic. 305 ~ Sarcophagi lids, casket and false sarcophagi, cremation receptacles (VIL17.3-6; VIL18.1)

LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHIC SOURCES,

Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig.

1. 2. 13. 14 15. 20. 21

Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig.

22. 23. 24. 25. 26.

Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig.

38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 49.

Fig. 32 Fig. 33.

Fig. 50. Fig. 51. Fig. 52. Fig. 53.

Fig. 54.

Fig. Fig, Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig. Fig.

58. 59. 62 63. 65. 68 69.

70. 71 72. 73. 82. 83.

Fig. 84.

Fig. 85.

Fig. 86.

Hydrographic Office ref. no. C. 69 Hydrographic Office ref. no. C. 68 BSA II (1895-96) Fig. 7 Brit, Mus. G.R. Dept, rep. no. 7 Brit. Mus. GR. Dept., rep. no. 6 Brit. Mus. GR. Dept. neg. no. 224684 Brit. Mus. G.R. Dept. neg. no. 224680 Brit. Mus. GR. Dept. neg. no. 224679 Brit. Mus. G.R. Dept. neg. no. 224678 Brit. Mus. GR. Dept. neg. no. 224677 Brit. Mus. G.R. Dept. neg. no. 224675 Brit. Mus. G.R. Dept. neg. no. 224674 Boston Arch. neg. nos. 11.619-11.620 Buttle Arch. Ph. 9/27 Jowett Arch. Ph. 415 Buttle Arch. Thesis Pl. 83 Author Author Author Buttle Arch. Ph. 9/28 Rowe Arch. Ph. 243 Buttle Arch. Ph. 8/1 Jowett Arch. Ph. 449 Jowett Arch. Ph. 450 Buttle Arch. Ph. 7/17 Rowe Arch. Ph. 245 Rowe Arch. Ph.31 Ant.Dept.Cyr. neg. no. F4643 Rowe Arch. Ph. 21 Rowe Arch. Ph. 18 Author Brit. Mus. G.R. Dept. neg. no. 224676 Cambridge Ancient History (1927) Ant. Dept Cyr. neg. no. F16 Author Author Author Ant. Dept. Cyr. neg. no. 999D. 11 Ant. Dept. Cyr. neg. no. 1111 E390 Ant. Dept. Cyr. neg. no. 992 E348 Ant. Dept. Cyr. neg. no. 1603 F777 Ant. Dept. Cyr. neg. no. 1602 £632

Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ant. Dept. Cyr. Buttle Arch. Ph.

neg. no. 1687 E638 neg. no. 882 F453 neg. no. 1691 F815 neg. no. 1635 F809 (unnumbered) 9/26

Author

‘Author DAI neg. no. 84.3679 Author Rowe Arch. Pb. 149 .

Rowe Arch. Rowe Arch. Rowe Arch.

Ph. 150 Ph. 235 Ph. 235

. . . . . .

Rowe Arch. Rowe Arch, Rowe Arch. Author Buttle Arch. Buttle Arch. Rowe Arch. Buttle Arch. Rowe Arch.

Ph. 236 Ph. 151 Ph. 28

.

Rowe Arch. Ph. 221

.

Author

Ph. 9/29b.

Ph. 9/29¢ Ph, 11/31 glass slide2” x 2” Ph. 314

. Rowe Arch. Ph, 68 Rowe Arch. Ph. 113 Buttle Arch. Ph. 11/26 . Buttle Arch. Ph. 11/30 . Buttle Arch. Ph. 11/23 . Butle Arch. Ph. 11/24 . Rowe Arch.Ph.99 . Rowe Arch. Ph.62 Rowe Arch. Ph. 109 . Rowe Arch. Ph.60 Buttle Arch. Ph. 11/33 . Rowe Arch. Ph. 3 . Rowe Arch. Ph. 5 . . . . . . . » . .

Rowe Arch. Ph. 11 Rowe Arch. Ph. 15 Rowe Arch. Ph. 74 Rowe Arch. Ph.78 Rowe Arch. Ph. 72 Rowe Arch. Ph. 76 Author Brit. Mus. GR. Dept. neg. no. 241781 Author Author Rowe Arch. Ph. 190 Rowe Arch. Ph. 194 Rowe Arch. Ph. 192 Rowe Arch. Ph. 197

557

Fig. 189. Author Fig. 192. Rowe Arch. Ph. 140 Fig. 194. Author Fig. 196. Rowe Arch, Ph. 209 Fig. 197. Rowe Arch. Ph. 141 Fig. 199. DAK neg. no. 42.368 Fig. 201. DAI neg. no. 58.2759 Fig. 204. Rowe Arch. Ph. (unnumbered) Fig. 205. Rowe Arch. Ph. (unnumbered)

ABBREVIATIONS

AA ADAJ A.Delt. Afelta Afr. Ita. Monog AJA Arch. Eph ASA ASR

Archiiologischer Anzeiger Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan Archaiologikon Deltion Africa Italiana Africa Italiana Monographs ‘American Journal of Archaeology Archaiologiki Ephimeris Annuario della Scuola Archaeologica di Atene. Antike Sarkophagreliefs Ath. Mitt. Mitteilungen des Kaiserlich Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Athenische Abteilung Archäologische Zeitung British Archaeological Reports Bulletin de Correspondance Héllenique British Museum Catalogue. Annual of the British School of Archaeology in Athens Bulletin de la Société r. d'Archéologie d’Alexandrie Bulletin of the Archaeological Institute of America Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Rome Deutsches Afrikakorps Documenti Antichi dell Africa Italiana Iscrizioni Cirenaiche Inscriptions of Roman Cyrenaica Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, Abteilung Istanbul Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts Journal of Roman Studies Lexicon of Greek Personal Names Lib, Ant. Libya Antiqua Lib. Ant. Suppl. Libya Antiqua Supplement MAC ‘Musée d’Alexandrie Catalogue Man. Guard Manchester Guardian Newspaper Mono. Arch. Lib. Monografie di Archeologia Libica Notiziario Notiziario Archeologico N.Sc Notizie degli scavi di Antichità PARA Pontificia Accademia Romana di Archeologia Papers of the British School at Rome PBSR Quad. Quaderni di Archeologia della Libia Quad. Suppl. Quaderni Supplement RA Revue archéologique. The Royal Geographical Society RG. Soc. SE. Cir. Supplemento Epigrafico Cirenaico Supplementum epigraphicum Graecum SEG

560

Society for Libyan Studies SLs Society for Libyan Studies Annual Report SLSAR Society for Libyan Studies Occasional Papers. SLSOP National Records Hydrographic Office, Ministry of Defence, Taunton. Hydro, Of. Nat. Lib. Scot, National Library of Scotland MSS Dept., Edinburgh Public Record Office Archives, Kew, London PRO Museum Archives Cyrene Museum Ant. Dept. Cyr Antiquities Department Lett.Book ——— Letterbooks c. 1920-1995 Ph.

Photographic Collection c. 1915-1995

British Museum Cent.Arch. Orig. Lett. Pap. GR Dept Orig. Lert. Ph.

Central Archives Original Letters and Papers Greek and Roman Department Original Letters c. 1860Photographic Collection

Draw. Rep.

Drawings and Watercolours Reports

MSS Dept. Manuscripts Department Manchester Museum (Man. Mus) Ph. Photographic Collection Society Archives RG. Soc. Arch. Library MSS Gill Captain W.J., Diary of Travels in Tripoli 1881 and 1882" Ref, 1989.0021; Papers of RG. Goodchild SLS Arch. Ref, 1990,0082; Papers of J. Ward-Perkins Personal Archives Burns Arch, Rowe Papers 1943-1968

Ph. Buttle Arch. Ph Cassels Arch.

Photographs miscellaneous Archives of Derek Buttle 1952 Photographs 1952 Archives of John Cassels 1953-1954

Ph.

Photographs 1953-1954

Dixon Arch. Archives of David Dixon 1957 Ph Photographs 1957 Fairman Arch, — Rowe Papers 1952-1959 Ph.

Photographs 1956-1957 Personal 1905-1958

Jones Arch.

Archives of Professor Barri Jones

Jowett Arch. Ph.

‘Map Room Miscellaneous Tracts Archives of Frank Jowett 1946-55 Photographs 1947-49

561

Archives of Alan Rowe 1952-59 Photographs 1952-56 Thorn Arch. Ph. ‘Tomlinson Arch. Ph.

Archives of James and Dorothy Thorn 1989-2000 Photographs 1989-1998

Archives of Richard Tomlinson March 1956 Photographs March 1956

Museum Collections. Brit.Mus.

Cyr. Mus. Man. Mus. Sousa Tolmeita Tripoli

British Museum Cyrene Museum Manchester Museum (exchange items) Apollonia Museum Tolmeita Museum Jamahitiya Museum, Tripoli

BIBLIOGRAPHY

The bibliography relating to the artifacts will be found in that volume. The accepted referencing for epigraphy is retained here under its respective abbreviations ADRIANI 1934 =, 1936 =, 1940 =, 1952 1966 AHLOWIST, 1995. AAEXANAPH 1969. ALZINGER, 1972-75 ANNANE 1968 Aun, 1927 ‘APPLEBAUM 1951 Baccurstut, 1976 =, 1980 - 1992 = 19934 =, 19938 = 19948 =, 19948 =, 19954 =, 19958

Apxiant A., Annuario del Museo Greco-Romano I (1932.33). ADRIANI A., ‘La Necropole de Moustafa Pacha’, Annuaire du Musée GrecoRomain (1933-34 -- 1934-35).

ApRIANL A., "Fouilles et Découvertes - Alexandria Nécropoles’, Annuaire du Musée Greco-Romain II (1935-39) ApRIANI A., Annuaire du Musée Greco-Romain ΠῚ (1940-50). ADRIANI A., Repertorio d'Arte dell Egitto Greco-Roman I, Series C. Anzovist A., ‘Pitture e Mosaici nei Cimiteri Paleochristiani di Siracusa: Corpus iconographicum’, Memorie LVI, Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti (Venice, 1995).

AAEXANAPH O., ἹΓἜφορεια Κλασσικον Αρχαιοτήτων Αφημθν᾽, A.Delt. XXIV, 25.88 Figs. 1-42 Pls. 37-66. Avaincsr W., "Von der Archaik zur Klassik. Zur Entwicklung des ionischen Kapitells in Kleinasien während des fünften Jahrhunderts v. Chr’, Ójh Band L (Wien 1972-75). Annan M., ‘Libya of Idris el Senoussi (Beirut 1968). AnrtC,, ‘Un Ritratto di Berenice di Cirene’, Afr Ita, I, 167-178 Figs. 1-9. ἈΡΡΙΈΒΑΟΜ S., “The Jewish Revolt in Cyrene in 115-117, and the Subsequent Recolonisation’, The Journal of Jewish Studies II, 177-186 (1951). BaccHIELL! L., ‘Le Pitture dalla "Tomba del’Altalena” di Cirene nel Museo del Louvre’, Cirene e la Grecia, Quad. VIII, 355-383 Tavv. III Figs. 1-16. Bacctusitt L., ‘La Tomba della *Cariatidi” ed il decorativismo nell'architettura tardo-ellenistica di Cirene’, Quad. XI, 11-34 Figs. 131. Baccutriis L., REYNOLDS J., REES B, ‘La Tomba di Demetria a Cirene’, Quad. XV, 5.22 Figs. 1-14 Tav. 1..

Bacci L., ‘Pittura Funeraria Antica in Cirenaica’, SLSAR XXIV, 77-116, Figs. 1-37. Baccumutt L., "La tomba cirenea del Buon Pastore’, PARA LXIII, 3-21, Figs. 1-9, Tavv. LIII (Rome 1995). BACCHIELLI L., ‘Cirene, Risorge L'Atene D'Africa", Archeo 116, Anno IX, numero 10, 63-109. Bacci L., ‘Un Sanctuario di Frontiera, fra Polis E Chora’, SLSAR XXIV, 4559, Figs. 1-16. BACCHMELLIL., ‘Berenice II la regina della riunificazione fra Egitto e Cirenaica’, Vicende e Figure Femminili in Grecia e a Roma, ed. R. Raffaelli, 239-248, Figs. 1-5 (Rome 1995). Baccum.tt L., "The Italian Archaeological Mission at Cyrene 1993-1994’, Lib. Ant. N.s. 1, 161-164 Pls. LXXV-LXXIX (Rome 1995).

564 =, 1996 =, 1999 =, 2002 -, BAILEY, 1972 =, 1981 =, 1988 = 1996. BanKES 1830 BaRATTE, METZGER 1985 BARKER, 1985 BARNETT, 1947 BEAN 1957 ‘BRECHEY 1828 ‘BELZONI 1822 BENDINELLI, 1922 BERENSON, 1938 BERGES, 1996 BERTARELLI, 1929 Bischt, 1972 =, 1996 BerANCOURT 1977 BIERBRIER 1995 BLINKENBERG 1898 BOARDMAN 1958 =, 2000 Bonacasa 2000 BONANOME 1995 BONANNO 1998 BONAPARTE 1809 BORRMANN 1888

Baccute11 L., ‘La Tomba di Thanatos nella Necropoli Sud di Cirene’ Lib. Poumon R,, Di Vira A., Di Vira Evaro G., Baccute1ut L., Libya: the lost cities of the Roman Empire’ (1999). Backs L,, La "Tomba dei Ludi” a Cirene : dai viaggiatori dell’ Ottocento alla riscoperta’ Quad. 16, 285-312 Figs. 1-14 Tavv. I-VI (Rome 2002). Baty D.M,, ‘Crowe's Tomb at Benghazi’, BSA LXVI, 1-12 Pls. 1-4. ΒΑΠΕῪ D.M., ‘Some Beechey Plans of Buildings at Apollonia’, SLSAR XII,

Ant. N.s. 2, 27-30, Tavv. III-V(1996).

61-74.

BalLey D.M,, ‘Crowe's Tomb at Benghazi — a Postscript’, SLSAR XIX, 87-94 Figs. 1.6. Baie D.M,, "Photographs of Libya 2’, SLSAR XXVII, 67-70 Figs. 1-4. Bankes WJ, Life and Adventures of Giovanno Finat (trans. and ed. WJ. Bankes London 1830). BARATTE F., METZGER C., Sarcophages en pierre d'époques Roman et Paleochrétienne" (Paris 1985). Banker G., Lovp J., ReynoLDs J. eds., ‘Cyrenaica in Antiquity’, SLSOP 1, BAR, International Series 236 (Oxford 1985). BarnerT R.D., ‘Tombs at Tocra’, JHS LXV (1947), 105-106 Figs. 1-2 BEAN G.E., Cook J.M., ‘The Carian Coast III’ BSA LII (1957), 58-146 Figs. 1-8 Pls. 18-19. Bexcuey F.W. and H.W., ‘Proceedings of the Expedition to Explore the Northern Coast of Africa from Tripoly Eastward’ (London 1828). Beızonı G.B., "Narrative of the Operations and Recent Discoveries etc.’ (London 1822) BENDINELLI G., ‘Ipogei Sepolcrali scoperti presso il km IV Via Trionfale’, N.Sc. XIX, 428-449, Figs. 1-13, Taw LIL. BERENSON M., ‘A Vicarious Trip to the Barbary Coast’ (London 1938). Bexots D., Rundaltäre aus Kos und Rhodos’ Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Abteilung Athen (Berlin 1996). Berraneıuı L.V., "Possedimenti e Colonie Isole Egee, Tripolitania, Cirenaica, Eritrea, Somalia’, Guida d'Italia del Touring Club Italiano (Milan 1929). ASA XLVIL-XLVIIL, N.S. XXXIBescht L., Divinita Funerarie Cirenaiche", XXXII (1969-70), 133-341. Figs. 1-120 (Rome 1972). Bescut L., ‘Sculpture in Greek Cyrenaica’ in Carratelli "The Western Greeks", 437-442 (1996). Berancourt P.P., ‘The Acolic Style in Architecture’ (Princeton 1977). BreReRIER MLL., ‘Who Was Who in Egyptology’ (London 1995). BLINKENBERG C., "Epidaurische Weihgeschenke’, Arh. Mitt. XXIII, 1-25, Figs. 1-12. BOARDMAN J., ‘Chian and Early Tonic Architecture’, Ant Jour, XXXIX (1958), 170-218, Figs. 1-5 Pls. XXVI-XXXV. BOARDMAN J, Persia and the West’ (London 2000) Bonacasa N., ENSOL! S. ed., ‘Cirene’ (Milano 2000). BoNANOME D., ‘Tl Rilievo da Mondragone nel Museo Nazionale di Napoli’, Accademia di Archeologia Lettere e Belle Arti di Napoli Monumenti X (Na poli 1995). BONANNO ARAVANTINOS M., La "Tomba dell’ Amazzonomachia” nella necropoli nord di Cirene’, cf. Catani (1998), 83-95, Figs. 1-5, Taw. FIX. I-V (Paris 1809). Bonaparte N., ‘Description de L’Egypte’, BORRMANN R,, 'Stelen für Weihgeschenke auf der Akropolis zu Athen’, [4] III, 269-285, Figs. 1-26.

565 BOUCHENAKI 1975 BOURVILLE 18482. =, 1848b = 1850 Briccia 1912 - 1922 =, 19320 -,1932b

BROWN 1957 Bnouskant 1974 BURTON BROWN 1948a ~1948b BUROLLET 1995 BusinG-KoLBE 1978 ‘Buzalan and Lioyp 1996 Burr 1957 Caccamo 1998 Camit 1992 CALVERT 1897 CARINGTON SMITH 1982 Cassris 1955 CATANI 1998 CenveLLt 1825 CHAMOUX 1953 =, 2002 CHERSTICH 2000 =, 2002

BoucHENAKI M., ‘Fouilles de la Necropole occidentale de Tipasa (1968.72}", Pub. de la Bibliotheque Nationale Histoire et Civilisations No.1 (Algiers 1975). De BoURVILLE J.V., ‘Lettre de M. Vattier de Bourville ἃ M. Letronne sur les Premiers Résultats de son Voyage ἃ Cyréne’, RA V.1, 150-154 pe BOURVILLE J.V., Quelques Notes Sur la Lettre de M. de Bourville, Relative ἃ l'Exploration de la Cyrénaique’, RA V.2, 279-281. DE BOURVILLE J.V., "Rapport au Ministre’, Archives des Missions Scientifiques et Littéraires, Vol.I, 580-586 (Paris 1850). Breccia E,, ‘La Necropoli di Sciatbi’, MAC I (Le Caire 1912). Breccia E., ‘Alexandria and Aegyptum’ (Bergamo 1922). Breccia E., "Le Musée Greco-Romain d'Alexandria 1925-1931’ (Bergamo 1932), Breccia E,, ‘(b) Ibrahimich. Sarcophages à guirlandes', Le Musée Greco. Romain 1925-31 (Alexandria 1932). Brown BR, ‘Ptolemaic Paintings and Mosaics and the Alexandrian Style’ (Cambridge Mass. 1957). BROUSKARI MS., "The Acropolis Museum, a Descriptive Catalogue’ (Athens 1974),

Burton Brown T., ‘Recent Work in the Dodecanese and Cyrenaica’, Antiguity ΧΧΤΙ, 75-78. Buxrow Brown T., ‘Hellenistic Burials from Cyrenaica’, JHS LXVIII, 148-152, Figs. 1, 2 (London 1948). Burowter T. ed, ‘A l'ombre de Vésuve’, Collections du musée national d'Archéologie de Naples (1995). von Βύξινο- ΚΟΙΒΕ A., "Frühe Griechische Türen", JdI XCIII, 66-174, Abb. 1:52. Βύζαιαν A., LLOYD J.A., ‘Early Urbanism in Cyrenaica: New Evidence from Euesperides (Benghazi)’, SLSAR XXVII, 129-152 Figs. 1-20. Burriz D., “The Greek and Roman Architecture of Cyrene’, Thesis no. 2280, John Rylands University Library, Manchester (1957). Caccamo CaLtasiaNo M., "Berenice II. Il Ruolo di una Basilissa Rivelato dalle sue Monete’, cf. Catani (1998), 97-112, Τανν. LIII. Caiui£ R., "Travels through Central Africa to Timbuctoo’ (1830, reprinted 1992).

Catverr F., ‘On the Tumulus of Choban Tepeh in the Troad’, JHS XVII (1897), 319.320. CARINGTON SMITH J., ‘A Roman Chamber Tomb on the South-east Slopes of Monasteriaki Kephala’, BSA 77 (1982), 255-293 Figs. 1-7 Frontispiece and Pls. 55-44. Casseis J., ‘The Cemeteries of Cyrene’, BSR XXIII (N.S.X), 1-43, Pls. Ixm. Catan Εἰ, MaRenco S.M. (ed), ‘La Cirenaica in Età Antica’ (Rome 1998). Cenvettt A., "Explication des dessins d'antiquités de la Cyrénaique’, Société de Géographie II, 1-30 Pls.LTII (Paris 1825). Ciamoux F., "Cyrene sous la monarchie des Battiades "Bibliotheque des Ecoles Frangaises d’Athenes et de Rome'Paris 1953). Cuanoux F., ‘La stéle funéraire d'Antonianos d'Ephése à Cyréne', Quad.16, 321325 Figs. 1-3 (Rome 2002). Ciustich L., "Tombe sull’antica strada Cirene-Balagrae’ (Draft version of 2002 thesis).

Cutrsmicu L., "Tombe sull'antica strada Cirene-Balagrae’, Tesi in Archeologia.

566 Cxorsy 1876 CIG III 1853 CLAIRMONT 1995 CLREN.1, 1931 CoLLIGNoN 1911 Comparerti 1914 Cook 1972 CosrE-MEsseLiks 1942-43 ‘Cowper 1897 CUMMING 1969-70 Davx, 1959 =, 1961 ‘DELIVORRIAS 1987

Delphi Tl Dennis 1870 Denr 1977 =, 1985

e Storia dell’Arte Greca e Romana, Università degli studi “Ὁ. D’Annunzio”, Chieti (2002) Choisy A, ‘Note sur les Tombeaux Lydiens de Sardes', RA XXXII, 73-81, Figs. 1-13, Pl. opp. 73. ed, Franz 1., 517-562, nos. 5129-5362b (Berlin 1853). Cramsont C.W,, ‘Classical Attic Tombstones’ (1993). Jacopi G., Monumenti di Scultura del Museo Archeologico di Rodi IT’ (Rodi 1931) CoLLIGNON M., ‘Les statues funéraires dans l'art grec’ (Paris 1911). Compasertt D., ‘Iscrizione Cristiana di Cirene', ASA I, 161-167, Figs. 1-3. Cook RM, 'Greck Painted Pottery (London 1972). De τὰ Cosre-Messeuitne P., "Chapiteaux Doriques de Delphes’, École Frangaise d’Athönes, BCH LXVI-LXVII (Paris 1944). Cowper H.S., “The Hill of the Graces’ (London 1897). Οὕμμινο D,, James Bruce in Libya 1766, SLSAR I, 12-18, Davx G., ‘Chronique des Fouilles en 1958, BCH LXXXIII, 567-793 Pls, XXXXXXIV. Daux G., ‘Chronique des Fouilles en 1960’, BCH LXXXV, 601-953 Pls. XVIILXXVI. Druivontus A., ‘Greece and the Sea’ (Amsterdam 1987). BousQuer J., Fouilles de Delphes: Le Trésor de Cyréne' (Paris 1952). Dewus G., ‘On Recent Excavations in the Greek Cemeteries of the Cyrenaica’, Trans. Royal Society of Literature, Second Series VoLIX, 135-182 (London 1870). Der JS, Lioyp J.A, Riuty J.A, ‘Some Hellenistic and Early Roman ‘Tombs from Benghazi’, Li Ant. XII-XIV, 131-212, Pls. LILLVI (Tripoli 197). Dent JS., Buri Practices of Cyrenaica’, SLSOP I, 327-336 Figs. 28.1-28.2, cf. Barker (1985). Dinsmoor W.B., ‘The Architecture of Ancient Greece’ (London 1975)

Dinsmoor 1975 ‘Dostas-LaLou, GWAIDER 1977 Dostas-LALOU C., GWAIDER R.A., "From the Cemeteries of Cyrene’, Lib Ant. Doc.Anr ΠῚ, 1933 11.2, 1936 EGGEBRECHT 1982 EICHLER 1913 EL FAKHARANI 1965 FABBRICOTTI 1996 =, 2002 FADEL, REYNOLDS 1997 Fepak 1990 FRASER 1950

NS. L3 (1997), 25-30 Pls. L.II.

Ouiverio G., ‘La Stele dei Nuovi Comandamenti e dei Cereali, Doc Anz. II Fasc. I (1933). Ouwvenio G., "Il Decrato di Anastasio Io su l'Ordinamento Politico-Militare Della Cirenaica’, Doc Ant. II, Fasc. II (1936) Eccesreci E. ‘Ägypten Faszination und Abenteuer’ (Mainz am Rhein 1982).

EICHLER F., ‘Zur Phaidimos-Basis’ Ojb XVI (1913), 86-102. Figs. 46-53.

EL FAaKHAraNt F., ‘Semi-Dome Decoration in Graeco-Roman Egypt’, AJA, LXIX, 57-62, Pls.15-16.

Fasswcorr E, "Divini funerarie cirenaiche da Barce a Tolemaide’, 117-126, Figs. 1-10 in ‘Scritti de Antichita in Memoria di Sandro Stucchi’, ed, Bacchielli L and Bonanno Aravantinos M., “L’Erma” di Bretschneider, Studi Miscellanei29, Vol. I (Rome 1996). Fassxicormi E., "Problemi di scultura cirenaica’, Quad. 16, 49-54 Figs. 1-8 (Rome 2002) Fapet. At MOHAMED, REYNOLDS J., Funerary Inscriptions of Cyrene’, Lib Ant. NS. L3 (1997), 31-46, Fig. 1, Pls. IILIX. ῬΕΡΑΚΊ., ‘Monumental Tombs of the Hellenistic Age’, University of Toronto Press (1990). ‘Fraser P.M., APPLEBAUM S., "Hadrian and Cyrene’, JRS, XL, 77-90 PL. V.

567 FreyeR-SCHAUENBURG 1974 Fmirmo 1997 Gain 1928 Gat, 1967 GARDNER 1888. GARDNER 1905 GantAND 1982 GASPERINT 1998. Guazat 1973 GhisLANZONI 1915 GILispre 1987 GoODCHILD 1968 1971 - 1976 το 1977 ‘Grecory 1909

Grins 1968 GRUBEN 1996

Guatanpr 1976 HAMILTON 1856 Haspeıs 1971 Heawoop 1950 Heserpy 1898

‘Frryer-ScHavenBur B., Bildwerke der Archaischen Zeit und des Strengen Stils’. Deutsches Archäologisches Institut (Bonn 1974). Frierto C., ‘Un esempio di architettura ellenistica funeraria a Cirene: la tomba S. 388", Lib. Ant, N.S. III (Tripoli 1997), 51-73, Figs. 1-20, Tavv.XIIXXVIII Gori A., "Manuale di Storia Politico-militare della Colonie Italiane’, Ministero della Guerra (Rome 1928). von Gatt Hl, ‘Felsgräber der Perserzeit im pontischem Kleinasien’, AA 82 (1967), 585-95, Figs. 1-10. Ganonen E.A., HoGartn D.G., James MR, Etsev Suri R, ‘Excavations in Cyprus, 1887-8", JHS IX (1888), 264-270, Figs. 1-7 Pl. VII. GARDNERP., "Vases added to the Ashmolean Museum pt. II, 65-85 Figs. 1-4, Pls. LVI. Gartanp RSJ., ‘A First Catalogue of Attic Peribolos Tombs’, BSA 77 (1982), 125-175, Figs. 1-12. Gasrenint L., "Novità Epigrafiche dal Settore Meridionale della Necropoli di irene’, cf. Catani (1998), 273-279, Figs. 1-3, Tavv. LIV. GHAZAL A., Recent Discoveries of Roman Rock-cut Tombs at Sidi Hassan Benghazi’, Lib.Ant. XIII-XIX (Tripoli 1973), 219-234, Pls. LIX-LXV. GHISLANZONI E., ‘Notizie archeologiche sulla Cirenaica’, Notiziario 1, Fasc. III, Anno I del n. 4, 1-175. Giuispre C.C., Dewackren M., ‘Monuments of Egypt - The Napoleonic

Edition’ (Princeton 1987).

Θοοροηπρ RG., Pepey J.G., Wire D., Recent Discoveries of Archaic Sculptures at Cyrene, a Preliminary Report’, Lib. Ant. II-IV, 179-198, Figs. 1-4, Pls. LXV-LXXII (1968). Θοοροηπ RG., ‘Kyrene und Apollonia’, (Zurich 1971). Goopcum RG., ‘A Hole in the Heavens’, Libyan Studies. Select Papers of the Late R.G. Goodchild (ed. J. Reynolds, London 1976), 268-341 Goopcui.p RG., Protey J.G., Wie D., ‘Apollonia, The Port of Cyrene. Excavations by the University of Michigan 1966-1967", Lib. Ant. Suppl. IV (1977). Grecory J.W., Report on the Work of the Commission sent out by the Jewish Territorial Organization under the Auspices of the Governor-General of. Tripoli to examine the Territory proposed for the purpose of a Jewish Settlement in Cyrenaica’ (London January 1909). Gruss W.F,, ‘The Excavations of Roman and Mediaeval London’ (London 1968). GRUBEN G., ‘Griechische Un-ordnungen’, 61-77, Abb. 1-20 in ‘Säule und Gebilk’, Zu Struktur und Wandlungsprozeß griechisch-romischer Architektur, Diskussionen zur Archäologischen Bauforschung Band 6 Deutsches Archiiologisches Institut Architekturreferat (Mainz am Rhein 1996). Guatanbl G., ‘Sculture di Rodi’, ASA LIV, NS. XXXVII, 7-260, Figs. 1.200. HAMILTON J., ‘Wanderings in North Africa’ (London 1856). Hasprıs CH.E., ‘The Highlands of Phrygia’ (Princeton 1971). Heawoon E, ‘Watermarks’, Monumenta Chartae Papyraceae Historiam

Ilustrantia I (Hilversum 1950).

Henenpy R., ‘Das Weiherelief des Lakrateides aus Eleusis’, Festschrift Benndorf, 111-116, Pl. 4.

568 Hırzı 1991 Hopcs 1975 HoFFER 1968 HoGaRTH 1905 Horn 1943 Hystop 1945. IC1961

Jow 1974 Jones 1971 1998 KARAGEORGHIS 1984 KAPAMHTPOYMENTEPZIAH 1987

KAwERAU 1907 Ke. 1930 Keves 1956 KNIGGE 1988 Korzac 1937 Kourountores 1933 KRARLING 1962 Lancet 1970 LARONDE 1987 Lauren 1988 LEHMANN 1962 LETRONNE 1848 LGPN LipoLis 1987 Lucas 1712

Hirz. L, ‘Die Griechischen Sarkophage der Archaischen und Klassischen Zeit’ (Jonsered 1991). Hope A.T., ‘Bevelled Joints and the Direction of Laying in Greek Architecture’, AJA LXXIX, 333-347, Pls. 56-57. Hoste, ‘Nouvelle Biographie Générale depuis les temps les plus reculés jusqu'à 1850-60, XXXIX, 12-15 (M. le Dr Hoefner ed.) (Copenhague reprint 1968). Hocaxra D.G., ‘Cyrenaica’ Monthly Review, Vol. XVIII, 90-106 (1905), Horn R,, ‘Kyrene’, Die Antike, 19 Band 197-203 (Berlin 1945). Hystor C.G.C. and APPLEBAUM S., ‘Cyrene and Ancient Cyrenaica’ (Tripoli 1945). Oliverio G., "Iscrizioni Cirenaiche', Quad. IV, 1-54, Figs. 1-49 (Carratelli GP. ed.) (1961). Jow E., Lucerne del Museo di Sabratha’, Mono, Arch. Lib. XI (Rome 1974). Jones G.DB., Lirtur J.H., Hadrianopolis’, Lib. Ant. VIII, 53-67, Figs. 1-6, Pls. XVILXXIII (1971). Jonts G.D.B., Wes A., Bevan N., ‘Pleasant Libyan Acres: the Territory of Cyrene’, cf Catani (1998), 281-288, Fig. 1. KarAzoncitts V., "Chronique des Fouilles à Chypre en 1983", BCH CVIII, 895-966, Figs. 1-173. ΚΑΡΑΜΗΤΡΟΥ. ΜΈΝΤΕΣΙΔΗ I, Ὃ Μακεδονικος Ταφος Σπηλιας Εορδαιας᾽, To Αρχαιολογικο Eoyo Sm Ma xedoma Kat Θρακη, 1 (1987), 23-36 Figs. 1-7, Pls. 1-6. Kawerau G., Eine Tonische Saule von der Akropolis zu Athen’, Jd! XXII, 197-207 Abb. 1-9 Taf. 4. Knut J,, Vorläufiger Bericht über die Ausgrabungen in Ephesos', Ojb Band XXVI, 1-18 Abb.1-5 (1930). Keyes E., ‘Geoffrey Keyes V.C. of the Rommel Raid’ (London 1956). Kwacor. U,, ‘The Athenian Kerameikos’ (Athens 1988). Korziac cNo N.E., Ὁ Taxa To Λεροδρομιου Ths Θεσσαλονικης (Σεδες) T: Taos’, Arch. Eph. (1937), 865-895, Figs. 1-29. Kourountores Κι, Guide Fig. 30. Krazine C.H., ‘Prolemais, City of the Libyan Pentapolis’ (Chicago 1962). LANCEL S, "Tipasinata IV: La nécropole romaine occidentale de la porte de Césarée', BAA IV, 149-266, Figs. 1-114. LaRONDE A. ‘Cyrene et la Libye Hellénistique Libykai Historiai’ (Paris 1987). Lauter H., ‘Hellenistische Sepulkralarchitektur auf Rhodes’ in Archaeology of the Dodecanese, The National Museum of Denmark, Department of Near Eastern and Classical Antiquities, ed. Soren Dietz and Ioannis Papachristodoulou, 155-163 Abb. 1-7 (Copenhagen 1988), LEHMANN K., ‘The Hall of Votive Gifts’, Samothrace 4 pt. 1 (London 1962).

pe BOURVILLE J.V. (ed. Letronne), ‘Sept inscriptions grecques trouvées à Cyséne, et deux autres de l'Arabic Petrée, trouvées à Constantine’, Journal des Savants 1848 (Juin), 370-377 (Paris 1848). Lexicon of Greek Personal Names, Vol. I Liprouis E., "Organizzazione delle Necropoli e Struttura Sociale nell’Apulia Ellenistica. Due Esempi: Taranto e Canosa’, 139-154, Taf. 14-18, von Hesberg H. and Zanker P. ed, Römische Griberstrassen’, Kolloquium in München, Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften (München 1987). Lucas P., ‘Voyage du Sieur Paul Lucas, fait par ordre du Roy dans la Gréce, PAsie Mineure, la Macedoine et l'Afrique" (Paris 1712).

569 Lour 1976 =, 2003 MACHATSCHELE 1967 Maceipy 1911 MasoLerri 1930 -,1931a τ, 19315 MAPKOYAAKH 1982 MARTINO 1908 ‘Masson 1974 MATHUISIEULX 1912 Marz 1968 MAYER 1995 McKenzie 1990 =, 1996 ‘MENDEL 1914 MERRILL.EES 1990 ‘MERTENS 1993 = 1996 MitıBuRN 1988 MINGazziNI 1966 MinisTERO 1941. Μινύτοιι 1824 MÜHLHOFER 1923 ‘Murray and Nurratt 1963

Lunt M., "Documenti per la storia della istituzione ginnasiale e dell'attività atletica in Cirenaica in rapporte a quelle della Grecia’, Cirene e la Grecia, Quad. VII, 223-284. Lunt M,, 'Nuove anfore panatenaiche da Cirene’, Studi di Archacologia Libica in Onore di Lidiano Bacchielli, Quad. 18, 97-113, Figs. 1.20 (Rome

2003).

‘MACHATSCHELE A., Die Nekropolen und Grabmalen im Gebiet von Elaiussa Sebaste und Korykos im Rauhem Kilikien’ (Vienna 1967). Macnipy T., ‘Un Tumulus Macedonien à Langaza’, JI XXVI, 193-215, Figs. 126. Μλιοιεττι B., ‘Le Fonti dell’Architettura Romana in Cirenaica’, Rivista delle Colonie Italiane, July 1930, 568-588 (Rome 1930). Marouerm: B., ‘L’Architettura della Necropoli di Cirene’, Rivista delle Colonie Italiane, September 1931, 714-722 (Rome 1931). Marocern B., "Tipi di Tombe nella Necropoli di Cirene’, Architettura e Arti Decorative, Anno II, 321-331 (Rome 1931). MaAPkOYAAKH. E, NiNioY-KivaEAH. B., Ἑλληνιστικος Λαζευτος Tadog χανιων Ἀνακαφη Οἰκοπεδου Μαθιουλακη᾽, A.Delt. XXXVII, 1-51 Pls. 1.32 (1990).

DE MARTINO G., 'Cirene e Cartagine - Note e Impressioni della Carovana de Martino - Baldari’ (Bologna 1908). Masson O., 'L'Inscription Généalogique de Cyrene (SGDI 4859)’, BCH XCVIII, 263-270 Figs. 1:2. ‘MarHuisieuLx H.-M., ‘La Tripolitaine d'hier et de demain’ (Paris 1912). Marz F,, ‘Die Dionysischen Sarkophage’ Teil I, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut (Berlin 1968). ‘Maver C., "Zur Datierung der Schrift dem Sarkophag $1’, 55-56 Abb. 13-14, 30-36, Taf. 14-15 "Via Sacra Ephesiaca II Grabungen und Forschungen 1992 und 1993’, Osterreichisches Archäologisches Institut Berichte und Materialien, Heft 6 (Wien 1995). McKenzie J., "The Architecture of Petra (Oxford 1990). McKenzie ., “Alexandria and the Origins of the Baroque Architecture’, in J.Walsh and T. Reese ed., Alexandria and Alexandrianism (California 1996). ‘Menpet. G., ‘Catalogue des Sculptures’, ΠῚ (Constantinople 1914). MERwLLEES RS,, Living with Egypt's Past in Australia’ (Melbourne 1990). ‘Mertens D., Der Alte Heratempel in Paestum und die Archaische Baukunst im Unteritalien’, Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Rom (Mainz am Rhein 1993). ‘MERTENS D., ‘Die Entstehung des Steintempels in Sizilien’, in ‘Säule und Gebalk’, Zu Struktur und Wandlungsprozeß griechisch-romischer Architektur, Diskussionen zur Archäologischen Bauforschung Band 6 Deutsches Archäologisches Institut Architekturreferat, 25-38 Abb. 1-6 (Mainz am Rhein 1996). MirLBurN R., Early Christian Art and Architecture’ (London 1988). Mincazzint P., L’Insula di Giasone Magno a Cirene’, Mono. Arch. Lib, VII, MiNISTERO DELLA CULTURA POPOLARE, ‘Che Cosa Hanno Fatto Gli Inglesi in Cirenaica’ (Rome 1941). Menu von Μινύτοιι, H.C., BARON, ‘Reise zum Tempel des Jupiter Ammon in der Libyschen Wüste und nach Ober-Aegypten in den Jahren 1820 und 1821" (Berlin 1824). MUKLHOFER F., Beiträge zur Kenntnis der Cyrenaika” (Wien 1923). ‘Murray H., Νύτταιι, M., ‘A Handlist to Howard Carter's Catalogue of Objects in Tut‘ankhamun’s Tomb’ (Oxford 1963),

570 Muzemy 2003 Mytonas 1961

Nea Paphos III Norton 1911 Otkonomoy

1931

Otiverio 1931

Olympia TL Opzno 1978-79 Opaanaos1968 Onsı 1909 - 1913 =, 1918 =, 1932 - 1933 Oxro 1992 PAcHO 1827 PARIBENI 1959 PaTON 1896 , 1900 PERNIER 1935 Perrot, CHIPIEZ 1892

Perot, GUILLAUME 1872 PESCE 1948 - 1950. PeTRAKOs 1991

PETRIE 1989 Φιλιος 1886 ῬΙΕΚΙΝῚ 1971

PIETROGRANDE 1930

EL Muzziny A., THORN D., CopLan THoRN J., Reynotps J., "Newly discovered funerary verses at Cyrene’, Studi di Archaeologia Libica in Onore di Lidiano Bacchielli, Quad. 18, 165-172 Figs. 1-4 (Rome 2003). My1onas G.E., ‘Eleusis and the Eleusinian Mysteries’ (Princeton 1961). Mlynarczyk J., ‘Nea Paphos in the Hellenistic Period’ (Varsovie 1990). Norton R,, "The Excavations at Cyrene. First Campaign, 1910-11’, Bulletin TI, 141-167, Pls. XLVI-LXXXI (New York September 1911). Οἰκονομοὺ FIL, Ὁ Ex Tov Αργειου ραιου Πηλινος Ousoxos Κατα , Eph, (1931), 1-53, Figs. 1-34. Neav Συμπληρωσιν᾽Arch. Outverto G., ‘Federico Halbherr in Cirenaica’ (Iuplio 1910-Aprile 1911), Afr. Ita, IV, 229-290, Figs. 1-66 Foglio 1-6 (1931). Kunze E, Scuteir H., ‘Bericht über die Ausgrabungen in Olympia’ (1937-38). Ὅρενο W.D., REYNOLDS J., ‘A Monumental Tomb at Cyrene’, Lib, Ant. XVXVI, 227-229, Pls. LXXIILLXXIV (1978-79). Orannaos A.K.,'I Aoxabua Αλιφειρα᾽, 203-243 (Athens 1967-68). Osst P., ‘Ipogei cristiani in contrada Cappuccia’, N. Sc. VI, 355-374, Figs. 14.29. Onsı P., ‘Di alcuni ipogei recentemente scoperti a Siracusa’, N. Se. X, 257-280, Figs. 1-21. Orsi P., ‘La Catacombe di S. Lucia Esplorazioni negli anni 1916-1919", N. Sc. XV, 270-285, Figs. 1-5. Onsı P., ‘Esplorazione di una necropoli in contrada Spina santa’, N. δὲ, NS.VIII, 137-149, Figs. 1-12. Osst P., "Templum Apollinis Alaci ad Crimisa Promontorium, Collezione Meridionale Diretto da U. Zanotti-Bianco (Rome 1933). DELL’OxTO L.F., ‘Rediscovering Pompeii’ (Rome 1992). Pacrio J-R,, ‘Relation d'un voyage dans la Marmarique, la Cyrénaique et les oasis d’Audjelah et de Maradeh’ (Paris 1827). Parent E., ‘Catalogo delle sculture di Cirene. Statue e relievi di Carattere religioso", Mono. Arch. Lib.V. Paton W.R, Myris J.L., "Karian Sites and Inscriptions’, JHS, XVI pt.l, 188-236 Figs. 1-12; pt. 2, 237-271 Figs. 1-45. Paton W.R,, ‘Sites in E. Karia and S. Lydia’, JHS XX (1900), 57-80, Figs. 142. PERNIER L., ‘Il Tempio e l'Altare di Apollo a Cirene (Scavi e Studi dai 1925 αἱ 1934}, Afr. Ita. Monog. V (1935). Perrot G., Ciüprzz C., ‘History of Art in Phrygia, Lydia, Caria and Lycia" (London 1892).

Parrot G., GUILLAUNE E., ‘Amasia’, in Rev. Arch. XXIV (1872), 201-220, Pls. XIX-XX, XX bis. Pesce G., ‘ll "Gran Tempio” in Cirene’, BCH LXXI-LXXH, 307-358, Figs. 18 Pesce G., Ἢ “Palazzo delle Colonne" in Tolemaide di Cirenaica’, Mono. Arch, Lib. TI. Pernakos V., Rhamnous’ (Athens 1991). PETRIE W.M. FLINDERS, ‘Ten Years Digging in Egypt’ (Chicago 1989). Pl. 3,1-2. Arch, Eph. (1886), 19-32, Φιλιος A., Ἑλευσινιακα Avaryhupa’, Pızrını M.G., ‘La Tomba “di Menecrate" a Barce in Cirenaica’, Quad. VI, 23-34, Figs. 1-16. PrETROGRANDE AL. ‘Sarcofagi decorati della Cirenaica’, Afr. Ita. III, 107-140, Pls. 1-26 (1930).

Poutport 1999. Pustic RECORD Orrice. ADM 2 co2 FO76 FO 160 FO 1015 WO 230 Rapr 1985 ‘RAUBITSCHEK 1943 REYNOLDS 1988 REYNOLDS, THORN 2005 ReyNoups 2003 Roserts 1907 ‘ROBERTSON 1974 ROBINSON 1913 ROMANELLI 1961 Roos 1972 ROSENBAUM 1960 Ross 1850 Rowe 1931 =, 1942 -, 1946 =, 1948 =, 1949 = 1952a = 1952b =, 1953

5n Pouion: R., Di Vira-Evrarp A., BACCHIELLI L., ‘Libya, the Lost Cities of the Roman Empire’ (Slovenia 1999).

Admiralty and Secretariat Out-Letters. Colonial Office, Africa Foreign Office, 1756-1837 Correspondence before 1906, Tripoli. Embassy and Consular Archives Correspondence. Administration of African Territories. War Office, British Military Administration of African Territories. Rapr W., ‘Ein holzerner hellenistischer Sarkophag aus Elaia bei Pergamon’, Ist, Mitt. 35, 139-172, Abb. 1- 2, Taf. 31.37. Ἀλύβπϑοηεκ A.E,, ‘Early Attic Votive Monuments’, BSA (1943), XL, 17-36, Figs. 1-43, Pls. 7-13 Reynotps J., Baccempts L., ‘Catalogo delle stele funeraria antropomorfe', Quad., XII, 489-522, Figs. 37-81 Reynoos J., ΤΉΟᾺΝ J., "Cyrene's Thea Figure Discovered in the Necropolis’ SLSAR (forthcoming) Wanp-Perkins J.B., Goovcui.p RG., ‘Christian Monuments of Cyrenaica’, ed, Reynolds J, The Society for Libyan Studies Monograph 4 (London 2003), Roserrs W., Sir William Beechey, R.A.’ (London 1907). RoBERISON D.S., ‘Greek and Roman Architecture’ (Cambridge 1974). RoBiNson D.M., ‘Inscriptions from the Cyrenaica’, AJA XVII, 157-200, Figs. 140. ROMANELLI P., "Un nuovo governatore della provincia di Creta e Cirene: P. Pomponio Secondo’, Quad. IV, 97-100. Roos P., "The Rock-cut Tombs of Caunus’, Vols. 1-2 (Göteborg 1972). Rosensaum E., ‘A Catalogue of Cyrenaican Portrait Sculpture’ (London 1960), Ross L., "Griechische Baudenkmäler: Das Brunnenhaus der Burinna und Das Heroon des Charmylos (Grab der Charmyleen) auf Kos’, AZ VIII, 241246, Tal XXII. Rowe A., ‘The Eckley B. Coxe Jr., Expedition Excavations at Meydüm, 1929-30" (Philadelphia 1931) . Rowe A., ‘Kom el-Shukafa, in the Light of the Excavations of the GraecoRoman Museum during the Seasons of 1941-1942", BSRAA Bulletin No. 35, NSS. XI, Fasc. 2, 1-45, Pls. I-XV (Cairo 1942).

Rowe A., "Discovery of the Famous Temple and Enclosure of Serapis at ‘Alexandria,’ Annales du Service des Antiquités de L'Egypte, Cahier No. 1 (Cairo 1946) Rows A., ‘History of Ancient Cyrenaica, New Light on /Egypto-Cyrenean Relations - Two Ptolemaic Statues found in Tolmeita’, Supplement aux Annales du Service des Antiquités de l'Egypte, Cahier No. 12 (Le Caire 1948). Rowe A., ‘A Priceless Discovery: Graeco-Roman Sarcophagi of Great Beauty. Grey Marble Sarcophagi unearthed at Alexandria; Illustrated London News CCXIV, June 25 1949, 893, Figs. 1-6. Rowe A., ‘Archaeology of Cyrenaica V - Dating The Round Tombs’, Man. Guard 22 Sept. 1952,4. Rows A., ‘Archaeology of Cyrenaica VI - Study of the Rectangular Tombs’, Man. Guard 11 Oct. 1952, 10. Row A., ‘A Contribution to the Archaeology of the Western Desert I’, Bulletin of the John Rylands Library, Vol. 36 (1953), 128-145, Figs. 1-2.

572 = 1954 = 1955 =, 1956a =, 1956b =, 1960 Rowe I Rowe II RUssELL 1993 ΣΑΒΒΟΠΟΥΛΟΥ 1992 ‘Saup FARA] 1979 Santucci 1995 =, 1996 =, 1998 - 2003 Sardis 1, 1922 ScHAZMANN 1934 SE.CR SEG IX, 1944 XVI, 1959 XVIII, 1962 SELTMAN 1927 SICHTERMANN 1959. SMALLWOOD 1951 SmerH 1982 SMITH and PORCHER 1864 Sum 1854. SNAPE 1997 STEPHEN 1885

Rows A., ‘Illustrating the Reported Discovery of Two Intact Funerary Boats of Cheops: the Great Pyramid of Giza, Reconstructed to Show the Splendours of 5000 Years Ago’ Illustrated London News, 956-957 (London June 5th 1954). Rows A., ‘Review’, JHS Vol. LXXV (London 1955), 187-188 RowE A., Faceless Goddess from Cyrene’, Man. Guard. 8, May 1956, 5 Rowe A., "The Secret Sarcophagi of Cyrene, Manchester University Team's Find’, Man. Guard 18 Sept. 1956, 5. Rowe A., ‘Some Details of the Life of Olga Serafina Rowe’ (MS 1960) Rowe A., ‘Cyrenaican Expedition of the University of Manchester 1952" (Man. Univ. Press 1956). Rowe A., ‘Cyrenaican Expeditions of the University of Manchester 1955, 1956, 1957’ (Man. Univ. Press 1959). Russtit J., Tales from the Archives’, 6 Archaeology, Vol. 00 (Mar-June 1993), Archaeological Institute of America, Boston University. ΣΑΒΒΟπουλου

©., Ὁ

B' Ταφικος Τυμβος ms Τουμπας Παιονιας", To

᾿Αρχαιολογικο Εργο Στὴ Μακεδονία Καὶ Θρακη 6 (1992), 425-431, Figs. 1:2, Pls.1-8. SAID. FARA, REYNOLDS J, "Inscriptions from Two Hellenistic Tombs in Cyrene’, Lib, Ant, XV-XVI, 231.237, Figs. 1-4 (1979). Sanruccı A., "La tomba cirenea N 226: dal monumento ellenistico alla riformulazione architettonica romana’, Quad. 17, 53-61, Figs. 1-6 (Rome 1995). Santuccı A., La Tomba del Capitello a Calice nella Necropoli Nord di Cirene’, Lib, Ant. Ns. 2,3135, Taw. VIX (1996). Sanzuccı A., ‘Il Santuario dell’Anax nell’Agora di Cirene’, cf. Catani (1998), 523-535, Figs. 1-4, Τανν. LVI. Santucct A., THORN J.C., ‘Tabuna-Windmill Tomb, Tomba dei due Coniugi, Tomba N.1: La grande Tomba Circolare della Necropoli Nord di Cirene’, Studi di Archacologia Libica in Onore di Lidiano Bacchielli, Quad. 18, 183-204, Figs. 1-23 (Rome 2003).

Butler H,C., "The Excavations Pt. 11910-1914’ (Leyden 1922). ‘ScHiazMANN P., ‘Das Charmyleion’, JdI, IL, 110-127, Abb. 1-9. Ouivuno G., Carareucı G.P. (D. Moret), 'Supplemento Epigrafico Cirenaico’, ASA XXXIX-XL, 219-375, Figs. 1-171, N.S.XXILXXIV (1961-62) (Rome 1963). IX fasc. I red. JJ. ErHondius, 97-102 inscription nos. 716-765. XVI red. A.G. Woodhead, 231-244 inscriptions 865-931. XVIII red. A.G. Woodhead, 228-242 inscriptions 726-733. Srutwan C.T., The Cambridge Ancient History’, Vol. I plates (1927). SicHTERMANN HL, “Archäologische Funde und Forschungen in der Kyrenaika AA (Berlin 1959), 241-347 Abb. 1-111. 1942-1958’, SMaLLwooD E.M., "The Hadrianic Inscriptions from the Caesareum in Cyrene’, JRS XLI, 37-38, PL VIII. Suri .C., ‘A Roman Chamber Tomb on the south-east slopes of Monasteriaki Kephala, Knossos’, BSA LXXVII (1982), 255-293, Figs. 1-7, Pls. 35-44. Sura RM., Pocher E.A., ‘History of the Recent Discoveries at Cyrene ‘made during an Expedition to the Cyrenaica in 1860-61 under the auspices ‘of Her Majesty's Government’ (London 1864). Suvru W.H,, “The Mediterranean’ (London 1854) Snare S., ‘Ramesses II's Forgotten Frontier’, Egyptian Archaeology, The Bulletin of the Egypt Exploration Society No. 11 (London 1997), 23-24. SrePHEN L., Dictionaryof National Biography’, Vol. IV (London 1885).

55 SruccHt 1964 - 1965 - 1975 1976 -, 1988 Sunpay GHIBLI

‘SvoRONOs 1901 ‘Texter, PULLAN 1849 ‘Tenerry 1977 ‘Taerscet 1900 THORN 1995

TOMLINSON 1967 =, 1993 ὕναινι 1985 ‘VALENTINI 1996 VaLtois 1921 Vickers 1971 ‘Wace AND Dickins 1907 WATZINGER 1905 WELD-BLUNDELL 1896 Warte, 1971

Sruccut $, ‘La tomba a tumulo presso Messa Cirenaica’, Lib Ant. I, 127-131, Taw. LXIILLXV (1964). Sruccht S., ‘L’Agora di Cirene’, Vol. I: I Lati Nord ed Est della Platea Inferiore, Mono. Arch. Lib.VII StuccinS, "Architettura cirenaica’, Moro. Arch. Lib., IX. Sruccim 8., ‘Notiziario’, Quad VIII, 465-492, Figs. 1.30 Sruccut $,, "L'architettura funeraria suburbana cirenaica in rapporto a quella delle chora viciniore ed a quella libya ulteriore, con speciale riguardo all'età ellenistica’, Quad. XII, 249.377 Figs. 1-211. “"El Ammerican” in Cyrene’, no. 383 (Ist May 1955), 5.

Svoronos LN.

Ἑρμηνεια τῶν μνημείων xov Ἐλευσινιάκου μυστικοῦ

κυκλου᾽ and Ἑρμηνεια tov e£ Ἐλευσινος πινακος᾽, ΠΑΝ 4 (1901), 487 ff. ‘Texter C., PULLAN P., "Description de l'Asie Mineure 3 (Paris 1849). ‘Tutenay N., "La Cappadoce entre Rome, Byzanée et les Arabes’, Comptes rendus des séances de l'Académie dell'arte Universita di Catania, 106-112 (JanMarch 1977). Truensch H., ‘Zwei Gräber der römischen Kaiserzeit in Gabbari’, BSRAA III, 7-40. ‘THORN J.C., ‘Warrington’s 1827 Discoveries in the Apollo Sanctuary at Cy rene’, SLSAR XXIV, 57-76 Figs. 1-14. THORN ].C., Reconstructing the discoveries of Alan Rowe at Cyrene’, SLSAR XXV, 101-118, Figs. 1-10. ‘THORN J.C., "Explorers of Cyrene 1822-1894” cf. Catani (1998), 537-578, Figs. 1-5, Tavv. LIV. HORN J.C., “Alan Rowe - A Biographical Chronicle’ (forthcoming). “THORN J.C, “The Discovery of the Tomb of Hetepheres’ (forthcoming) ‘TroRN].C., "The Tomb of Grenna’ (forthcoming). ‘THORN ].C., ‘Drawings of Beechey in the Department of Greek and Roman, British Museum’ (forthcoming) TOMLINSON R.A., ‘False-fagade 241-256, Pls. 44-47.

Tombs

at Cyrene’,

BSA

(1967),

LXII,

Tomunson RA., "From Mycenae to Constantinople’, 129-144 Figs. 1-11 (London 1993). ὕναινι A., ‘Considerazioni su Alcuni Fenomeni di Litizzazione di Strutture. Lignee nell Architettura della Cirenaica’, SLSOP 1, 87-96, Figs. 7.11 - 7.111, cf. Barker (1985). Vatenmini W., ‘Il Naiskos dei Carneadi a Cirene, una nuova revisioni del dati di scava' in 'Scriti de Antichitä in Memoria di Sandro Stucchi’, a cura di Bacchielli L. and Bonanno Aravantinos M., Studi Miscellanei 29, Vol. I, 293-306, Figs. 1-17 (Rome 1996). VatLois R,, "Le Bas-Relief de Bronze de Delos’, BCH XLV, 242-269, Figs. 1.2. Vickers M., Bazama A., ‘A Fifth Century B.C. Tomb in Cyrenaica’, Lib. Ant. VIII, 69-84 Pls. XXIV-XXXII (1971). Wack AJB, Dicks G., ‘Excavations at Sparta 1907, BSA XIII (1906-1907), 155-168, Pls. VI VII Figs. 1-8 (London 1907). Warzincer C., ‘Griechische Holzsarkophage aus der Zeit Alexanders des Grossen’ (Leipzig 1905). WLD-BLUNDELL J.R., ‘A Visit to Cyrene in 1895’, BSA II, 112-140 (Athens 1895-6).

Ware D., "The Cyrene Sphinx, its Capital and its Column’, AJA LXXV (1971), 47-55 TII. 1-3, Pls. 5-10.

574 1990 =, 1993 =, 1996 - 1998 ‘Wipric 1960 WIEGAND 1904 WILKINS 1812 WricHT 1963 - 1993 ‘YALOURIS 1968 Zane 1975

‘Wurre D., WARDEN G., Ouiver A., CRABTREE P. AD ΜΌΝΟΕ J., The Extramural Sanctuary of Demeter and Persephone at Cyrene, Libya IV, Pt. I ‘The Small Finds’, Pt. II ‘Glass’, Pt. ΠῚ ‘Faunal and Human Remains from Cyrene’ (Philadelphia Monog.67 1990). Wurre D., The Extramural Sanctuary of Demeter and Persephone at Cyrene, Libya V "The Site’s Architecture, Its First Six Hundred Years of Devel‘opment’ (Philadelphia Monog., 76 1993). Ware D., ‘Marsa Matruh: the resurfacing of ancient Paraetonium and its ongoing reburial, ed. Bailey D.M. in Archaeological Research in Roman Egypt, JRA Suppl. 1 9 (London 1996). Wire D., Stranger in a Strange Land: The Untold Story of the 1909 Bates Expedition to Cyrene’, ARCE XXX, 163-178 Figs. 1-11 (1998). Winric W.M., Goonciitp R.G., ‘The Western Church at Apollonia in Cyrenaica’, BSR XXVIII (1960), 70-90, Pls. XXVI-XXXIII. WIEGAND T., ‘Die Archaische Poros-Architektur der Akropolis zu Athen’ (Cassel und Leipzig 1904). Wiss W,, The Civil Architecture of Vitruvius’ (London 1812). Wiucirr GRH., Excavations at Tocra incorporating Archaeological Evidence of a Community of the Diaspora’, Palestine Exploration Quarterly (1963), 22-64, Figs. 1-15 Pls. XLXIV. Weicht G.RH,, ‘Obituary for C.N. Johns’ SLSAR, Vol. 24 (London 1993). Yavounis H., ‘Unusual Form of Tombs and Burial Customs’, Athens Annals of ArchaeologyI, 189-193, Figs. 1.5. Zaxite J., "Harpyiemonumentet i Xanthos, En Iykisk pillegrav’ (Copenhagen 1975).

CATALOGUE

CONTENTS

Page 579

Introduction Glossary

581

Abbreviations

585.

Bibliography

585

Metals and Semi-precious Materials

SECTION I

Categories L5

Silver. Bronze Iron. Lead Glass Calcite 4042 Bone Addendum I

(As) (Ae). ΓΝ Qu. (Se) (Ce). (Os) (Add. T)

SECTION IT Categories 41 Black Figure 48.61 Red Figure 62 Relief 5:69 Stamped 7076 Ribbed 7118 Coral Red 79.114 Black Glazed Addendum I

Fired Clays - Painted and Glazed Finewares

(Bo (o (Gg) (Be) (Bp (Cn Gp... (AddD . Fired Clays - Painted, Slipped and Moulded

SECTION It

Categories 115-118 119-132 133-135 136-140 141-142

Bichrome Red Corinthian Red Local Red African Red.

591

Qv) (Pw) (Sw) (Sw) (Sw)

et

578

143-145 Fine Red 146-149. Black 150 Relief 151.174 Moulded ‘Addendum ΠῚ

(sw) Gu. Qu). (Ὁ. (AG Fired Clay - Undecorated Ware.

SECTION IV Categories 175-236 Plain ‘Addendum IV

(Uw) (Add. IV) ‘Igneous and Caleareous Rock, Organic

SECTION V Categories 237-245 Marble 246-264 Limestone 265.267 Organic ‘Addendum V

(Mb) (15) ... (Op)... (Add.V) Illustrated Artifacts and Concordance

REGISTER 1952 MAJA

659

First Campaign Assemblages XI. . . Second Campaign ἔχει Third Campaign nn

1955 M.175.364 Assemblages XII-XXVI 1956 M365-822 Assemblages XXVI-LXX . 1957 M.823-1334 Assemblages LXXI-CXXIX

661 612

Fourth Campaign ΝΞ

APPENDIX 1952 1955 1956 1957 INDEX

Complete Complete Complete Complete

lis of list οἱ list of list of

artifacts artifacts artifacts artifacts

found found found found

during during during during

first campaign. second campaign third campaign fourth campaign.

783 787 793 804 819

INTRODUCTION

Rowe's original Object Register, the linchpin of his work forming this volume, was not recor-

ded in the list of his effects in 1968, and the copy deposited in Cyrene Museum was not found

when enquiries were made there. What is known is two sample sheets, each titled ‘Manchester

University, Department of Near Eastern Archeology’, Cyrene Expedition Object Register’ and

divided into columns, the first one blank with a pair of holes and the others headed ‘Reg. No.’, ‘Description’, ‘Material’, ‘Size’, ‘Provenance’, ‘Photo No.’ and ‘Date found’. The double foolscap sheets (343 x 430mm) had 30 lines for entries below the headings and were dated individually for each campaign. They additionally bore a watermark of a castle above ‘1011’ (Dixon and Burn

Arch.sample sheet; Thorn (1994), 105). Some of the registered artifacts for the fourth campaign,

such as M. 1177.1, 1177.2, 1177.3 and 1177.4, two bell kraters and a kylix krater, have a small alphabetical suffix for each individual fragment, but more commonly Rowe used a large alpha-

betical suffix, e.g.M.12054, 1205B as his system for denoting pieces added later to the register, which consisted of an estimated 70 or more pages, probably in a binder fastened with two brass

screw pillars, In 1958 Alan and Olga Rowe extracted and transcribed half the field entries for

publication. Their criterion was apparently to include complete artifacts and avoid duplicates where possible, with the exception of fragments of red-figured ware, terracotta figurines and statuary (Rowe II, 13-32 Pls. 1-42). The result of this method was that assemblages were not always

published in their entirety, an approach which has dogged excavations at Cyrene both before and

after Rowe's work. It was possible, however, to reconstruct extensive parts of the register with the

rediscovery since May 1996 of Rowe’s 1952 campaign notes, 1955-1956 Day Books and the master set of 1956-1957 photographs, together with the previously known personal notes and photo-

graphs of Buttle, Cassels and Dixon. A bonus was the discovery in Cyrene of original site labels, some with their artifacts. The result is that (a) all the known surviving artifacts from the excava-

tions have been illustrated in order to mirror the lost register, any gaps being caused by the diff

culty of untraced items which have a system of symbols, given in the Glossary; (b) the additional information pre-empted a new Register Catalogue which shows original registration numbers in a

coded system of entries, explained in the Glossary, and differs in function from the lost original by having a Concordance of identified artifacts assigned to numbered categories, rather than be-

ing restricted within a type sequence. I have added a small alphabetical suffix to the original main

register number of clutches of sherds belonging to numerous vessels, which Rowe often registered as "Attic fragments’,

to identify individual vessels e.g. M. 976, 976a-j, where necessary. The cate-

gories are arranged initially in order of excellence, or by size. Any variations within a category are defined by shape numbers, which can be referred to as c.g. ‘Cat. 126 Shape I’, representing Μ. 789, whereas Shape II represents M. 790. The small Roman numeral system is merely a cursor

to arrange artifact descriptions. My method of cross-referencing is to use the category number followed by Rowe's original register number, e.g. ‘Cat.126-789". The descriptions make use of certain words and also abbreviations for materials and measurements which are explained in the

Glossary.

GLOSSARY

Descriptions - Catalogue Untraced

Complete Broken in antiquity Similar to... As. String-cut Knife-cut Turned Associated coins Other: Comment: Example: Variant: 1. D Materials. Ag Silver Ae Bronze Pb Lead Fe Iron Sg Silica glass Ce Calcite Oss Bone Te Terracotta Worked Stone Mb Marble Is Limestone Measurements H Height L Length W.

Width

Artifact unavailable for study entire broken at time of burial compares with another resembles another described Base cut from wheel with string cut from wheel with knife lathed Numismatic dating Duplicate from the excavation Additional information Duplicate from provincial or more distant source ‘Artifact with slight variation in shape Left Right Fired Clays

BE RE Gr Bg Pw Sw Rw uw

Organic

Black figure Red figure Coral red Black glazed Painted ware Slipped ware Relief ware Undecorated ware

Og

Organic

D. Lig, Cap.

Depth Diameter Liquid Capacity

Dia.

Note: Some artifacts between M.599-801 show Lig.Cap. uncompleted. This is because the material was unavailable due to the move to the new magazzini in 1992.

Cyrenaican Collection Euesperides Dennis

CN. Johns’ excavations, Benghazi and Ashmolean Museums George Dennis excavations and purchases

582

Werry Brit. Mus. GR. Inv. Cyrene Mus. Coll. Inv. Graeco-Roman Mus. Inv.

Symbols - Illustrations. Drawn with:

Number prefixed by: no prefix M Sousa Tripoli Concordance - Codes Appendix Bold numbers Unbold Italic Bracketed Si

Francis Werry excavations and purchases British Museum Graeco-Roman Department Cyrene Museum Graeco-Roman Museum, Alexandria Artifact reconstructed based on a complete example conjectured

Artifact drawn from photograph drawn from description Artifact in Cyrene Museum ‘Manchester Museum Apollonia Museum Jamahiriya Museum, Tripoli published unpublished from contemporary handwritten notes number suggested through elimination original numbered site label, some including descriptions

ABBREVIATIONS

Delphi Expedition

Fouil. et Rech, Hesperia Histria Isthmia

Kerameikos Kerameus Lindos MAC MLC Olynthus. Perachora RIC TAM Tocra

The Athenian Agora, Results of Excavations conducted by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens (Princeton) Antiquités Africaines, Editions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique Clara Rhodos, studi c materiale pubblicati a cura dell'Istituto Storico-Archeologico di Rodi 1923-1941 Results of the Excavation conducted by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens Corpus Signorum Imperii Romani Corpus Vasorum Antiquorum Exploration archéologique de Delos faite par l'Ecole Francaise d’ Athens Exploration archéologique de Delphi faite par l'Ecole Francaise d’Athens The University Museum Magazine of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of Pennsylvania Fouilles et Recherches (Razkopki i prouchvanya) Musée National Bulgare Sofia Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens Institut d'Archéologie de Bucarest, Editura Academici Republich Socialiste Romania Excavations by the University of Chicago under the Auspices of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens. Deutsches Archiiologisches Institut Forschungen zur Antiken Keramik Fouilles et Recherches d'Acropole 1902-1914 et 1952, Fondation Carlsberg-Copenhague Musée d'Alexandrie Catalogue Musée du Louvre Catalogue. Excavations at Olynthus conducted by the John Hopkins Univ. Expedition under the Auspices of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, The Sanctuaries of Hera Akraia and Limenia, Excavations of the British School of Archaeology at Athens 1930-1933 Roman Imperial Coinage Treasures of Ancient Macedonia, pub. Greck Ministry of Culture and Science (exhibition catalogue, Archaeological Museum of Thessalonike) (Athens 1979) Excavations at Tocra conducted by the British School of Archaeology at Athens 1963-1965

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Some authors mentioned will be found in the text bibliography. Archacological sites are referred to by name and volume number, and each Corpus is given its accepted referencing. ABV ABV Suppl. Agora IV xu XXIII ALEXANDRESCU 1978 ANDERSON 1967 ARV BACCHIELLI 1981 ΒΑΠΕΥ 1985 BARKER 1985 Barroccını 1928-29 Besques 1954 BEsques 1992 Bist 1970 BLINKENBERG 1898 BMC

Glass Lamps Lamps ΠῚ Pul Sculp. LII E. Sculp Stamps Terra Terral

Beazuev J.D., ‘Attic Black Figure Vase-painters’, ABV (Oxford 1956). Beazley Addenda by Carpenter ΤῊ. 2nd edition, ABV Suppl. (Oxford 1989). Howanp RH,, ‘Greek Lamps and their Survivals’ (1958). Spankes B.A., Tatcorr L., ‘Black and Plain Pottery’ (1970). ‘Moore M.B., PHuippres M.S-P., ‘Attic Black-Figured Pottery’ (1986). ALEXANDRESCU P., ‘La Céramique d'Époque Archaique et Classique (Vlle.1Ve'S)’, Histria IV (Bucuresti 1978). ANDERSON J K., "Corinth. Temple E, Northwest. Preliminary Report 1965", Hesperia XXXVI, 1-12 Figs. 1-6 Pls. 1-6 ΒΕΛΖΙΕΥ J.D., ‘Attic Red Figure Vase-painters’, 2nd ed. (Oxford 1963). BaccHIELLi L., ‘L’Agora di Cirene’ Vol. ΠῚ L’Area Settentrionale del Lato Ovest della Platea Inferiore, Mono.Arch. Lib, XV (1981). Banev D.M., ‘Excavations at Sidi Khrebish, Benghazi (Berenice)’ Vol. III-2: The Lamps, Lib. Ant Suppl. V (1985). Barker G., Liovp J., REYNOLDS J. ED., ‘Cyrenaica in Antiquity’ BAR International Series 236, SLSOP I (Oxford 1985). Barroccint R, "Scavi e Rinvenimenti in Tripolitania negli Anni 1926-1927’, Afr.Tta, ΤΙ, 187-200 Figs. 1-5 Tav. I-II (1930). Besquss S., ‘Catalogue Raisonné des Figurines et Reliefs’ MLC Terre I (Paris 1954), Besquss 8., ‘Catalogue Raisonné des Figurines et Reliefs’ MLC Terre IV pt. II (Paris 1992). Bist AM, ‘Scoperta di due tombe Puniche a Mellita (Sabratha)’, Lib. Ant NI-VIU, 189-229 Pls. LI-LVI (1970). BLINKENBERG C., ‘Epidaurische Weibgeschenke’, Ath Mitt, XXIII, 1-23 Figs. 1-12 (Athens 1898) British Museum Catalogue (London), Hanven D.B., ‘Catalogue of Greek and Roman Glass’ (1981), Barey D.M,, A Catalogue of Lamps ‘Greek, Hellenistic and Early Roman

Pottery Lamps’ (1975).

ibid. "Roman Provincial Lamps’ (1988). Port RS., "The Ptolemies, Kings of Egypt’ (1883) Suri A.H., ‘A Catalogue of Sculpture in the Department of Greek and Roman Antiquities’ Vols. ΓΙ (London 1900). Bupcs E.A. WALLIS, ‘A Guide to the Egyptian Galleries (Sculpture)’ (1909). Morton A.H., ‘A Catalogue of Early Islamic Glass Stamps’ (1985). Waters H.B,, "Catalogue of the Terracottas’ (1903). Hicains R.A., ‘Catalogue of the Terracottas (1969).

586

Vases II Vases ΠῚ Vases IV Weights Cyr BoanoMan 1970 Breccia 1930 1934 BRONEER 1938 1958 Buaw 1994 Casto 1991 CHITTERDEN 1947

Wacrers H.B., ‘Catalogue of the Greek and Etruscan Vases, Black-Figured ‘Vases’ (1893). Suri C.H,, ‘Catalogue of the Greek and Etruscan Vases, Vases of the Finest Period’ (1896). WALTERS H.B., ‘Catalogue of the Greek and Etruscan Vases, Vases of the Latest Period’ (1896). LANE-PooLe S., ‘Catalogue of Arabic Glass Weights’ ed. Poole RS. (1891). Rosinson E.S.G., ‘Catalogue of the Greek Coins of Cyrenaica’ (1927). ΒΟΑΚΌΜΑΝ 1., ‘Greek Gems and Finger Rings’ (London 1970). Breccia E,, ‘Terracotte Figurate Greche e Greco-Egizie’, MAC IL-1 (Bergamo 1930). Breccia E, ‘Terracotte Figurate Greche e Greco-Egizie', MAC IL2 (Bergamo 1934), BRONEER O., “Excavations on the North Slope of the Acropolis 1937’, He265 Figs. 1-88 PL I (1938) BRoNEER O., ‘Excavations at Isthmia Third Campaign 1955-56", Hesperia XXVII, 137 Pls. 1-17 (1958). Βύκν L.M,, ‘Hellenistic Terracotta Figures of Cyrenaica: Greek Influences and Local Inspirations’, SLSAR XXV, 147-158 Figs. 1-4 (1994), Caspo E., ‘The “Kottabos-Toast” and an Inscribed Red-figured Cup’, Hesperia LX, 367-382 Pls. 97-100 (1991). CHITTERDEN J., ‘Master of Animals’, Hesperia XVI, 89-114 Pls. XV-XXI (1947).

vi

Jacort G., ‘La Necropoli Di Pontamo’, 119-164 Figs. 1-47 (1929). Jacort G., ‘Scavi Nella Necropoli Di Jalisso 1924-1928", 1-302 Figs. 1-279 Tav. I-VI (1932). ‚Jacopı G., ‘Monumenti di Scultura Del Museo Archeologico di Rodi? II

VLVIL

Jacopı G., ‘Esplorazione Archeologica Di Camiro II’, 1-219 Figs. 1-266

Corner 1949

Consert P.E., ‘Attic Pottery of the Later Fifth Century’, Hesperia XVIII, 298-351 Figs. 1-8 Pls. 73-103. Bronzer O., ‘Terracotta Lamps’, (Cambridge Mass. 1930). Epwanbs G.R, ‘Corinthian Hellenistic Pottery’ (Princeton 1975). Davinson GR, ‘The Minor Objects’ (Princeton 1952). BLEGEN C.W., PALMER H., YOUNG RS., "The North Cemetery’ (Princeton

CLRb. II m

Corinth IV-IL ὙΠ XII XIII XVI XVIII Corre 1911 CSIRILI 12 CVA America T Danemark IV Deutschland I IL VI XVI

(Rodi 1931). (1932-33).

1964).

STILLWELL A.N,, ‘The Potters Quarter, The Terracottas’ (Princeton 1952). STILLWELL A.N., BENSON J.L., ‘The Potters’ Quarter’ (Princeton 1984). DELLE CORTE M., ‘Di un sepolcreto delle necropoli Sannitica di Pompeii, Scoperto presso la Porta Stabiana’, N.Sc.VIII, 106-111 Figs. 1-7 (Roma 1911). Great Britain, HUSKINSON J., Roman Sculpture from Cyrenaica in the British Museum’ (London 1975). Great Britain, WALKER S., ‘Catalogue of Roman Sarcophagi in the British Museum’ (London 1990). Gallatin Coll. New York, Hoppin J.C. and Gallatin A. (Paris 1926).

Copenhagen IV, Blinkenberg C. et Johansen (Paris 1951). Bonn I, Greifenhagen A., (München 1938). Berlin I, Eilmann R. und Gebauer K., (München 1938), München II, Greifenhagen A., (München 1939) Schloss Fasanerie (Adolphseck) II, BrommerF., (München 1959).

587

xu uv Espagne II IIT France VI vn XII XXIX Great Britain IIT

xm

Talia XIX

XVI

L

Schweiz II v Dawkins 1911 DELLA CELLA 1822

Delos XVIII xxi XXII xxvi Delphi I Cyrene I Siphnos ν Dennis 1848 DUNBABIN 1944 Epcan 1903 ELRASHEDY 1985 2002 ERMETI 1981 Giamuzzi 1971 Gismonpı 1951

GoLDman 1940 Hayes 1972 Howamp 1954

Isınas 1957

Mainz I Busing-Kolbe A., (München 1977). Tubingen V, Burow J., (München 1986). ‘Madrid II, Melida ].R., (Madrid 1949). Barcelone I, Gimpera & Serra i Rafols (Barcelone 1957). Mouret Coll. Mouret F., (Paris 1927). Cabinet des Medailles (Paris 1928). Sevres, Massoul M., (Paris 1936). Rennes, Laurens A.-F. et Touchefeu O., (Paris 1979). Oxford I, Beazley J.D., (Oxford 1927). Reading Univ.I, Ure P.N. and Ure A.D., (Oxford 1954). Edinburgh, Moignard E., (Oxford 1989). Genova I, Brea L., (Roma 1942). Palermo, de la Genitre J., (Roma 1971). Zurich, Isler H.P., (Bern 1973). Ostschweiz Ticino, Metzger LR., (Zürich 1979). Dawkins RM., ‘Archaeology in Greece (1910-1911) JHS XXXI, 300-301 (London 1911). Deut CELLA P., "Narrative of an Expedition from Tripoli Barbary, 1817" trans. by Aufrere A. (London 1822). Deonna W,, ‘Le Mobilier delien’ (1938). Ducas C., ‘Les Vases Attiques à Figures Rouges’ (1952). LAUMONIER A., ‘Les figurines de terre cuite' (1956). Bruneau P., "Les Lampes! (1965). Bovsougr J., Fouilles de Delphes II Topographie et Architecture: Le Trésor de Cyréne’ (Paris 1932). Doux G., HANSEN E., "Fouilles de Delphes II Topographie et Architecture: Le Trésor de Siphnos' (Paris 1987). Prnpmuzer P., ‘Fouilles de Delphes V: Monuments figures, petits bronzes, terre cuites, antiquités diverses’ (Paris 1908). Dennis G., “The Cities and Cemeteries of Eritrea’ (abr. ed. Pamela Hemphill) (Princeton 1985). Donnanin TJ. ed., ‘Archaeology in Greece 1939-1945 The Khaniali Tekke Treasure’, JHS LXIV, 84-88 Figs. 2-4 Pls. VIII, IX (London 1944) Epcar M.C.C., Greek Sculpture, ‘Catalogue Général des Antiquités Egyptiennes du Musée du Caire’ (Cairo 1903). Exnasepy F., ‘Attic Imported Pottery in Classical Cyrenaica’, SLSOP I, 205-217 Pls. 17. LIII, cf Barker (1985). Eikaskedv F., "Imports of Post-Archaic Greek Pottery into Cyrenaica’, BAR International Series 1022 (2002). Eruett ALL, ‘L’Agora di Cirene’ Vol. 1Π:| Il Monumento Navale, Mono. Arch, Lib. XVI (1981). GiamBuzzi G., "Lessico delle Iscrizioni Latine della Cirene’, Quad. VI, 44-104. Gisvoxpr L, ‘Il Restauro dello Strategheion di Cirene’, QuadII, 7-25 Figs. 1:21 (1951).

GoipMaN HL, "The Acropolis of Halae', Hesperia IX, 381-514 Figs. 1-260. (1940). Haves J.W., ‘Late Roman Pottery. A Catalogue of Roman Fine Wares’ British School at Rome (London 1972). Howanp S., Johnson F.P., "The Saint-Valentin Vases’, AJA Second Series LVIII, 191-207 Pls. 32-34 (New York 1954). Isinas C., ‘Roman Glass from dated finds’(Groningen 1957).

588 Isthmia I Ivanov 1948

JacossrHAL 1956 Jones 1973 KARAGEORGHS 1986 KENRICK 1985 Kenr 1981 Rerameikos TX ΧΙ Kerameus VI Knossos Lane 1947 LEHMANN 1955 LEONE 1915 Lindos

m

I

Liovp 1979 Lunt 1985 ‘McPue 1976 MAFFRE 1998. Manion 1976 Masset 1978. MENGARELLI 1915 Mites 1948 Monern 1977 Moscart 1987 Necrocorinthia

Ouiverto 1928-29 1930

Bronzer O., ‘Terracotta Lamps’ (Princeton 1977). Ivanov T., ‘La Céramique de la Nécropole d’Apollone’, Fouil. et Rech. II (Sofia 1948). JacossrRAL P., ‘Greek Pins and their Connections with Europe and Asia’ (Oxford 1956).

Jones J.E., ‘Bechives at Trachones, Attica’, BSA LXVIII, 443-452 Pls. 83-85 (1973). KARAGEORGHIS V., ‘Chronique des Fouilles et Découvertes Archéologiques en 1985", BCH CX, 671-880 Figs. 1-180. Kenrick P.M., ‘Excavations at Sidi Khrebish, Benghazi (Berenice)’ Vol. III1: The Fine Wares, Lib. Ant. Suppl. (1985). KenrJ.P.C,, ‘The Family of Constantine I’, RIC VIII, Spink (London 1981). Knice U., ‘Der Sudhiigel’, (Berlin 1976). SCHEIBLER L, "Griechische Lampen‘, (Berlin 1976). ‘Leza-Harter A., Eretria-Maler und sein Kreis Der Eretria-Maler Werke und Weggefahrten’, (Mainz 1988). CoxpstrEAm J.N., ‘Knossos, The Sanctuary of Demeter’ BSA Supplementary Vol. 8 (London 1973). Lane A., ‘Greek Pottery’ (London 1947). Lexan K., Samothrace Fourth Preliminary Report’, Hesperia XXIV, 1-30 Pls. 1-18 (1955). Leung J., ‘L’emplacement de Fouilles Archéologiques sur la Nécropole d'Elconte de Thrace’, BCH XXXIX, 135-237 Figs. 1-8 Pls. XI-XV (1915). BLINKENBERG C., KINCH KE., ‘Les Petits Objects’ (Berlin 1931). Dycove E., "Le Sanctuaire d'Athena Lindia et l'Architecture Lindienne’, (Berlin/Copenhague 1960). [μον J.A. ed., ‘Excavations at Sidi Khrebish, Benghazi (Berenice)’ Vol. II: Economic Life at Berenice, Sculpture and Terracottas, Coarse Pottery, Lib. Ant. Suppl. V (1979). ‘Luni M,, ‘Atelier di Lucerne di Cirene’, SLSOP I, 259-276. McPaie LD., ‘Attic Red Figure of the Late 5th and 4th Centuries from Corinch’, Hesperia XLV, 380-396 Pls. 85-92 (1976). Marra .]., ‘Pidces de Céramique Grecque Conservées a Cyréne’ in La Ciremaica in Eta Antica’ ed. Catani E. and Marengo S.M., 351-361 Tav. LXI (Rome 1998). Manion J,, ‘Inscriptions sur objets Métalliques en Maurentanie Tingitane’, Ant. Afr. X, 93-105 (Paris 1976). Masser L., ‘Gli Askoi a Figure Rosse nel Corredi Funerari delle Necropoli di Spina’ (Roma 1978). Mencaretit R., "Nuove esplorazioni nella necropoli di Caere. Tombe di età posteriore al V sec. av. Cr., e cippi Sepolcrali’, N.Sc:XII, 347-386 Figs. 1-29 (Roma 1915).

Mites G.C., "Early Arabic Glass Weights and Stamps (The American Numismatic Soc. 1948). Monrn M., 'Cerveteri! (Novara 1977). Moscarı S,, ‘Italy Before Rome’ (Milan 1987). Payne H., ‘Necrocorinthia, a Study of Corinthian Art in the Archaic Period’ (Oxford 1931).

Ouiveno G., ‘Campagna di Scavi a Cirene nell’estate del 1927’, Afr. Ita. II, 111-154 Figs. 1-65 (1950). Outvero G., ‘Campagna di Scavi a Cirene nell'estate del 1928", Afr. Ita. III, 141.229 Figs. 1-95 (1930).

589

Olynthus IV v x ΧΙ XIII Onsı 1897 PAGENSTECHER 1923 Pease 1937 ‘PEMBERTON 1970 PENSABENE 1988 Perachora 1 π PERNIER 1927 1931 RICHTER 1961 Sanrucct 2000 Schaus 1992 ‘SEpDON 1994 ‘Sua 1970 1973 Succ 1967 Sweer 1987 Tatcorr 1935 TARAMELLI 1918 ‘THOMPSON 1965 THOMPSON 1934 1935 1958 Tocra 1

RoBINSON D.M., The Terra-Cottas of Olynthus found in 1928” (1931). Roainson D.M., ‘Mosaics, Vases and Lamps of Olynthus’ (1933). Rosınson D.M., ‘Metal and Minor Miscellaneous Finds’ (1941). Rosınson D.M., "Necrolynthia, A Study in Greek Burial Customs and Anthropology’ (Baltimore 1942). ROBINSON D.M., ‘Vases found in 1934 and 1938” (1950). Orsi P., ‘Di alcune necropoli secondarie di Siracusa’, N.Sc. I, 471-504 Figs. 1.42. PAGENSTECHER R., "Malerei und Plastik’ Griechisch-Acgyptische Sammlung Ernst Von Sieglin (Leipzig 1923) Pras MZ, ‘A Well of the Late Fifth Century at Corinth’, Hesperia VI, 257-316 Figs. 1-47 (1937) PEMBERTON E.G., ‘The Vrysoula Classical Deposit from Ancient Corinth’, Hesperia XXXIX, 265-307 Figs. 1-6 Pls. 66-75 (1970). PENSABENE P., ‘Statuine fitii votive della cirenea’, Quad XII, 93-169 Figs. 1.86 (1988), PAYNE H. et al., ‘Architecture, Bronzes and Terracottas’ (Oxford 1940). Donnasin TJ. ed., ‘Pottery, Ivories, Scarabs and other objects from the Votive Deposit of Hera Limenia (Oxford 1962). PERNIER L., ‘Campagna di Scavi a Cirene nell'estate del 1925", Afr. Ita. I, 126-155 Figs. 1.23 (1927). PERNIER L., ‘L’Artemision di Cirene', Afr. Ita. IV, 173-228 Figs. 1-44 (1931), Rıcırren G.M.A., ‘Archaic Gravestones ofAttica’ (Exeter 1961). Baccmeuur L, Micueut M.E., Sanrucct A., UnLENBRocK J.P., ‘Il Santuario delle Nymphai Chthoniai a Cirene’ Micheli M.E., Santucci A., (ed), Roma (2000). ScHaus G., "Pottery from the Sanctuary - A Question of Function’, Expedition 34, (1-2), 24-33 Figs. 1-15 (Philadelphia 1992). SEDDON M.B., PraG AJ.N.W., THoRN J.C., ‘Poiretia Compressa (Mousson, 1859) from a Hellenistic Archaeological Site in Libya’, Journal of Conchology XXXV No. 2 (1994), 149-156 Figs. 1-3 (London 1994). SHEAR T.L., "The Monument of the Eponymous Heroes in the Athenian ‘Agora’, Hesperia XXXIX, 145-222 Pls. 41-58 (1970). Suan T.L., ‘The Athenian Agora Excavations of 1972", Hesperia XLII, 359-407 Pls. 65-76 (1973), Sruccar $., 'Cirene 1957-1966: Un Decennio de Attività della Missione Archeologica Italiana a Cirene', Quad. Suppl., 3 (1967). Sweet W.E., ‘Sport and Recreation in Ancient Greece’ (Oxford 1987). Tatcorr L., ‘Attic Black-glazed Stamped Ware and other Pottery from a Fifth Century Well’, Hesperia IV, 476-523 Figs. 1-28, TanameLit A., ‘Ricerche ed esplorazioni nell’antica Cornus’ N. Se. XV, 285331 Figs. 1-67. TuowssoN D.B., “Three Centuries of Hellenistic Terracottas’, Hesperia XXXIV, 34-71 Fig. 1 Pls. 13-22 (1965). THOMPSON H.A, "Two Centuries of Hellenistic Pottery’, Hesperia III, 311-476 Figs. 1-122 PI. ΠῚ (1934). ‘THOMPSON H.A., "Buildings on the West Side of the Agora’, Hesperia IV, 1.226 Figs. 1-126 Pls. VIII (1935). TrowrsoN H.A., ‘Activities in the Athenian Agora 1957’, Hesperia XXVII, 145-160 Pls. 41-46 (1958). ‘BOARDMAN J., HAYES J, "Excavations at Tocra 1963-65, The Archaic Deposits T BSA Supplementary Vol. 4 (London 1966).

590 u Ue 1927 1934 Une 1936 VANDERPOOL. 1946 ‘Wants 1977-78

BOARDMAN J., Haves J, ‘Excavations at Tocra 1963-65, The Archaic Deposits ILand Later Deposits’ BSA Supplementary Vol. 10 (London 1973). Une PNN,, ‘Sixth and Fifth Century Pottery from Rhitsona’ (London 1927). Une ΡΝ, ‘Aryballos and Figurines from Rhitsona in Βαοιία᾽ (Cambridge 1934). Une A.D., ‘Red figure cups with incised and stamped decoration I’, JHS LVI, 205-215 Figs. 1-13 Pls. XI-XIII (London 1936). VanDerroOL E., ‘The Rectangular Rock-cut Shaft’, Hesperia XV, 265-336 Pls. XXV-LXIX (1940). Wants S., "Two Funerary Statues at Cyrene’, SLSAR IX, 47-49 Figs. 1-2 (1977-78).

Way 1849 WEBER 1914 WEINBERG 1949 1954 Warte 1990 N'rirraken 1921 WizuaMs 1983 WISEMAN 1967 Young 1951

‘Way A., ‘Communication Note’ Pro. Soc. Ants. London I (April 1843-April 1949), Weser W., Der Acgyptisch-Griechischen Terrakotten’, Mitteilungen aus der Aegyptischen Sammlung, Band II (Berlin 1914). WEINBERG SS, ‘Investigations at Corinth 1947-48", Hesperia XVIII, 148-157 Pls. 13-24 (194! WeinneRG $S., ‘Corinthian Relief Ware: Pre Hellenistic Period’, Hesperia XXIII, 109-137 Figs. 1-3 Pls. 25-33 (1954). Ware D., WARDEN G., OLIVER A., CRABTREE P. and ΜΌΝΟΕ J., The Extramural Sanctuary of Demeter and Persephone at Cyrene, Libya IV, Pt. I ‘The Small Finds’, Pr. II ‘Glass’, Pt. ΠῚ ‘Faunal and Human Remains from Cyrene’ (Philadelphia Monog. 67 1990). Wurrake J.LS., ‘Motya A Pheenician Colonyin Sicily (London 1921). Wıruiams C.K., ‘Corinth, 1982: East of Theatre’, Hesperia LII, 1-32 Figs. 1-16 Pls. 1-11(1983).

WiseuaN J., "Excavations at Corinth. The Gymnasium Area 1965", Hesperia XXXVI, 13-41 Figs. 1.22 Pls. 7-16 (1967). pulturae Intra Urbem’, Hesperia XX, 67-134 Pls. 33-54 (1951),

SECTION I

Gold is only represented by a thin fire-gilding on bronze leaves and terracotta beads connected with wreaths (Cat. 12). Silver appears as jewellery, mostly pulled wire mounts for various precious stones, and as a small collection of coins (Cats. 1-5). Bronze artifacts are connected with hygiene and personal usage, such as strigils, spatulas, tweezers, needles and mirrors (Cats. 6-14) and also a large collection of coins (Cat. 16). Tron objects are represented by long pins (Cat. 17); items of a structural nature such as spiked bosses representing door furniture; and nails and straps, possibly from coffins or biers (Cats. 19-21). Lead was used for false strigils and miniature mirrors (Cats. 23-25). Silica glass is connected with personal hygiene, represented by millefiori from an alabastron (Cat. 28) and colourless glass from balsamaria, unguentaria and perfume bottles (Cats. 29-31), with personal adornment; represented by beads from necklaces (Cat. 35); with receptacles for nutritional needs, as jugs, bowls and goblets (Cats. 32-34); and entertainment, as an astragal and coloured gaming counters (Cats. 36-37). A significant piece is the Islamic coin weight which represents trade contact between Grenna (Cyrene) and Egypt. Caleite is connected with personal hygiene, represented by an alabastron (Cat. 39), but in 1925 receptacles for nutritional needs were found by Oliverio (Fig. 85; 115.2). Bone pins and a pyxis are connected with personal adornment (Cats. 40-41) and a spoon represents personal usage (Cat. 42) NOTES Glass balsamaria: Tocra RAF tombs, ef. (Add. 1).

592 LIST OF CATEGORIES

Lead

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Bar Pendants Necklaces Chained Pins Finger Rings Numismatics

Bronze

6. 7. 8, 9. 10. 1L. 12. 13. 14. 15.

Suigils Spatula Tweezers Turned Disk Mirrors Plain Disk Mirrors Model Handled Disk Mirror Gilded Bronze Wreath Sewing Needles Small Rings Nails and Studs

16.

Numismatics

23. 24 25. 26. 21.

False Strigil Model Handled Disk Mirror Model Tanged Disk Mirrors Lead Pipe Sheeting

Silica Glass 28, 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38.

Alabastron

Balsamaria Unguentaria Perfume Bottle Jug

Bowls Goblet Beads

Astragal

Gaming Countess Islamic Coin Weight

Calcite

39,

17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22.

Pins Rectangular Plate Spiked Bosses Straps Disk Headed Nails Rod or Chisel

Alabastron

Bone

40.

al. 42.

Pins Pyxis Spoon

593 SECTION

I

vii.

1204

untraced.

Rowe:

‘Hole

at

one

end.

Haematite. L.3.8 (0.038 m). Comment: Groove on side of gemstone suggests mount as vi. Suspension loop 1195a untraced, as xv.

SILVER (Ag) Nos. 1-5

1. Ear Pendants Fig. 412

i, 1191a untraced, 1191b Pointed crook of wire ending in flattened fishtail, now broken. H. 0.019 m. Comment: Small ivory figures ii and iii probably attached to these.

viii, 1200 Scaraboid straight-sided. Intaglio engraved horizontally: predator, probably a lion, carıying a smaller animal. Rock crystal, hole drilled through with nicks at side of mouth. Fragment of Ag wire visible in hole. Crystal H. 0.010 L. 0.013 W. 0.007 m.

ii, 1198

(side view). Two

joined

ivory standing

figures facing each other clasping hands downwards, surface decomposed. Drilled hole between heads to take figure-of-eight suspension loop. Ivory

Comment: Gemstone archaic form (Boardman (1970), 191-192 Fig. 200). Nicks on side of gemstone suggests suspension as vi.

di . 1203 (front view) Two joined ivory standing figures, male and female, surface as i . Ag twisted wire loop around each neck, forming a third between for suspension. IvoryH. 0.017 m, with Ag

ix. 1201 Scaraboid as viii, clear moulded silica glass, surface decomposed. Intaglio area: standing male figure1. in combat with a lion r., small disk above. Glass H. 0.015 L. 0.018 W. 0.010 m. Comment: Suspension loop untraced (Rowe II Pl. 25a). Probably mounted behind as suggested by its shape

iv HI unprovenanced. Unclosed pointed wire ring descending into diminishing coil. H. 0.023 Dia, 0.014 m.

x. 1194 Centrepiece-- raised, with two rows of re-

Ag mount as i, twisted loop, ends threaded through and coiled. Amber L. 0.011 Dia. 0.009 m. Ag loop H. 0.012 surv. L. 0.016 m.

xi. 1193 untraced. Rowe: ‘Pendant. Mask(2) Silver ring attached. L. 1.8 cm’ (0.018 m).

i i, 1202 Barrel bead, as ii, suspension loop larger. Amber L. 0.012 Dia. 0.008 m. Ag loop H. 0.014 L. 0.018 m. iv. 1195¢ Ag loop, as ii but smaller, bead lacking,

xii, 192a untraced. Rowe: ‘Two rings. Silver D.14; D.5mamt’ (Cat. 4-1192b).

H. 0.020 m with Ag loop H. 0.027 m.

loop H. 0.0225 m.

poussée decoration, making indentations underneath. The middle was a flat oval which has since disintegrated (Rowe II Pl. 25b). At the sides ribbed 2. Necklaces Fig. 412 tubes with unclosed seam. H. 0.015 L. 0.022 W. m. i, 1199 Astragal, deep orange amber, surface de- 0.004Comment: Thessalonike, gold necklace composed. Ag horizontal mount, coiled and twisted found in cist Neapolis, 0.670 m, oval centrechain grave, suspension loop (Cat. 35-312). Amber H. 0.009 L. piece L. 0.030, H. 0.022 m, L.garnet intaglio showing 0.018 W. 0.010 m with Ag loop H. 0.020 m. Eros, 3rd cent. B.C. (TAM 78 Pl. 43 no. 307.) The i, 1196e Barrel bead, amber as i with drilled hole. Cyrene piece possible earlier representation,

H. 0.008 L. 0.009 m.

v. 1196a untraced. Biconical bead as xiv, setting asvi

vi. 1197 Camelian barrel bead, drilled hole, Ag vertical cagelike mount, small suspension loop. Carnelian H. 0.015 Dia. 0.006-0.010 m with Ag loop H.0.021 m.

xi , 1196b untraced. As xiv, small droplet, twisted loop. xiv. 1196d untraced. Rowe: ‘Four small pendants. Material uncertain. Silver ring attachments H.14 ems. Comment: Description includes ἢ, v and xii Xv. 1195b, d untraced. Rowe: ‘Four small pendants. Wire. Silver. 9 mm. (Rowe IL PI. 25b). Comment: Description includes iv and vii.

594

3. Chained Pins Fig. 412 i, 1190a Pin, dome-headed, small loop at neck for attachment, pointed slender stem. Liaison chain fixed by ring attachment to terminal, upper part rectangular in section, lower part a cylindrical sleeve gripping braided wire chain with holding bands at each end. Pin L. 0.040 Head Dia. 0.0065 Chain Surv. L. 0.050 Th. 0.002 m. Comment: In Tekke Treasure the two vases in the Tholos tomb each yielded a pair of chained pins, together with other 8th century jewellery (Dunbabin (1944), 85-86 Pls. VIILIX). The unrobust nature of the Cyrene examples, which are later in date, was also a feature of the Tekke pins, thought to have been used on a Cretan mantilla. Pin L. 0.060, chain L. 0.120 m (Jacobsthal (1956), 20 Fig. 58).

ring

ii, 1190b Partner to i but less complete. 4, Finger Rings Figs. 308, 408, 412

1.55 untraced. Rowe: ‘Ring with oval seal. Silver. Rowe Arch. Phs. 284, 285. Comment: Ring Type V or VI (Boardman (1970),

BRONZE (Ae) Nos. 6-16 6. Strigils Figs. 322, 366, 371, 397, 404, 410,

421,423

i. 861 Handle concave, sides tapering towards

blade, club-shaped end. Blade broad and spoon shaped tapering towards tip. Shallow concave section. Variant: (Olynthus X, 175 Pl. XXXIIIno. 524), ji, 798 Similar to i, club-shaped end incomplete. Blade straight-sided, rounded tip. Deep concave section. Associated coins (Cat. 5-800, 801) 475.375 BC. Variant: Rhitsona Necropolis Grave 139 (Ure (1934), 80 PLXX) ca. 440-430 B.C; Obntbus X, 177-178 Pls. XXXIV-XXXV nos. 541, 546), i i, 1146 Handle fragment as ii, raised border between junction of spoon and handle. iv. (1206) Rowe:

‘Frags of Strigil’. Handle com-

2.6 L. seal 2.1 ’ D. ring

plete, straight-sided with serrated club-shaped end.

214 Fig. 217).

Examples: (Corinth XII, 183 Fig. 28 no.1312; Perachora I, 180 Pl. 80 no.15; Olynthus X, 175 Pl.

i , 1192b Complete. Broad, oval section, butt joint. (Cat. 3-1192a),

XXXIII no. 523). v. 1187 Similar to iv.

i i. 1092a Complete. Broad, square section. Other: 1261 iv, 1172a«c untraced. Rowe: “Three earrings. L. 2.2; 2.2; 1.2. 5. Numismatics

Report by Prof.T.V. Buttrey

Published Coins Healy xiv-xviii Figs. 360, 366

The five missing coins are redated based on pub lished descriptions (Rowe II, 32), now untraceable (Cat.16-311a et al). One surviving coin in silver (Cat. 16-1024), xiv. 739 Not identified xv. 740 308-277 B.C., xvii. 800 435-375 B.C.5 xvi 741 308-277 B.C.; xviii. 801 475-435 B.C. Comment: Identification of xviii confused, mis print Healy: ‘silpbium plant of type Ila’ (BMC Cyr PL. VD incompatible, shows type la; if now correct, then above date likely

vi. 1264 Blade fragment, similar toii vii. 219 Tip of pointed blade.

viii. 1092, 1092g, h Handle shape as i, shieldshaped end. Spoon square-ended at junction with handle, pointed tip to blade. Shallow concave section. ix. 137a, b Handle shape as iv with lancetshaped end. Spoon splayed at junction with handle, swelling outwards towards tip. Shallow concave section. x. 1289 Untraced ‘Strigi? could alternatively be iv.

7. Spatula Fig.329 i, 322 Complete. Flat-bladed, concave sides, plain, round-sectioned stem, olive-shaped end. Example:

(Delos XVIII, 222

Fig. 248); Siracusa

Necropolis, Sepulchre XI (Orsi (1897), 495-496 Fig, 32). Complete, L. 0.185 m approx. associated with Ae cosmetic pot.

595 159-160 Fig. 152) Dia. 0.080 m; (Olynthus X, 171 PL XXXI no. 515)4th cent. B.C. 11. Model Handled Disk Mirror Fig. 560

8. Tweezers

i. (Sarcophagus N. 83-BH) untraced, Rowe: ‘a Pair of bronze tweezers’ (Rowe (1956), 5). Associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C. Variant: Cyrene Northern Necropolis (Thorn (2001) 1.4.2 Cyrene A).

i, 735 Undecorated, surface corrosion, handle recently broken. Dia. 0.066 Th. 0.0025 Handle W. 0.017 m. Associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C. Examples: (Corinth XII, 182, Pl. 81 no. 1306; Perachora I, 180, Pl. 80 no. 14).

9. Turned Disk Mirrors Figs. 360, 397

12. Gilded Bronze Wreath Figs. 327, 329,

i 736 Complete. Obv: single groove at edge. Surface obliterated in antiquity by deliberate scratches. Rev: disk edge raised, central compass point surrounded by series of concentric grooves. Dia. 0.108 Th. 0.002 m. Associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C. Others: 80, 994, 1092c Examples: Cyrenaica, Dennis Brit. Mus. GR. Inv. 1866, 4-15, No. Dia. Th. 240 0210 0.003 Possibly lying over femur. Dennis Brit. Mus. G.R. Inv.1866, 10-20, No. Dia. Th. No. Dia Th

360, 393, 395-396

i. 1080a Main stem, cut lead strip, punched circu. lar holes at intervals to accommodate bronze leaf stems which survive in this particular instance.

i , 1080b Lancet shaped leaves, lower part surviving, gilded on one side but not along leaf stem. Example: Benghazi Tomb C (Dent (1983), 183, Fig. 14 nos. 121, 122), found around crushed skull with ix,

iii, 321e Leaf stem, ungilded, end bent at right angles, possibly for hooking on to main stem. 115 0137 0004 120 0.003 Others: 73, 1081b, H. III. 4. view 116 0.115 000 121 0.075 0.002 Variant: El Merj, Aslaia burial (Vickers (1971), 117 0114. 0003 122 0.148 0.002 79-80 Pl. XXXIIb). Ag, same leaf construction. 118 0.150 0.004 123 0.189 0.002 iv. 1059 Thin strip, long, ungilded, broadening at 119 0.54 0.002 124 0.098 0.001 ‘one end into part of leaf stem. Ant. Dept. Sousa Museum Necropolis Tomb e Others: 73, 321f, 1081c (Goodchild (1977), 122 Tav. XXIc Inv. 66-464) Example: Cyrenaica, Dennis Brit. Mus. G.R. Inv. Dia. 0.098 Th. 0.002 m. ca. 350 B.C; Benghazi 1866, 4-15, 261. Tomb A (Dent (1983), 177 Fig. 12 no. 110) Dia. 0.178 m; Alexandria, Graeco-Roman Mus. Inv. v. 1081d Thin strip, long, ungilded, remains of 21922, covering bolsal, Dia. 0.100 m approx. terracotta fruit adhering at one end. Variants: (Corinth XII, 182 Pl. 81 no. 1308) Dia. Other: 314, H. IILA. viii with (Cat. 13-321 other), 0.152 m; (Obnthus X, 172 Pl. XXXI no. 516) coin, 515. Example: Cyrene Northern Necropolis, Norton early 4th cent. B.C. i , 1092b Obv: plain. Rev: as i. Dia. 0.069 Th. 0.002 m.

1911 Excavation as in ix.

vi. 321d Broad strip, amorphous, ungilded, associated with some wreath elements.

Others: 10816, f, 1189.

10. Plain Disk Mirrors Fig. 329

i. H. IIL4.iv Recent break, lightly Example: Benghazi Tomb A 177-178 Fig. 12 nos. 111,113) Dia. Jalisso Necropolis Grave 157 (Cl.

corroded surfa(Dent (1983), 0.062, 0.080 m; Rb. III (1929),

ces. Dia. 0.075 Th. 0.002 m. Others: 247b, 1021

vii. 304a Buds (tabled below), ovoid, small i cised cross on top, groove around neck. [5048 associated coins (Cat. 16311a, b, c) late 4th-308, 246222, 145-116 B.C.; 744a associated coins (Cat.

5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C.].

596 Others: 308, 315a, 7444, 1082a.

Example: Cyrenaica, Bourville Louvre Inv. MN. 690 (Besques (1992), 82 Pl. 49b no. D. 4433), includes fruit ix. viii. 744b Flowers (tabled below), discoid, back shows small prodded hole in centre or at edge. [5058 associated coins (Cat. 16-311a, b, c) late 4th 308, 246-222, 145-116 B.C.; 744b associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C.] Other: 75, 305b.

ix. 304e Fruit. Rowe: ‘berries’. Hand-modelled clay spheres, prodded circular hole on one side, white coating as ground for thin gold covering. Flat bronze wire strip jammed into hole (304e). Spheres differ only in size, as tabled below. Others: 72, 157, 305c-e, 315c-e, 559, 576, 744c-e, 845d, e, 936d, e, 945, 946, 953d, e, 1079c-e, 1082d, e.

Examples: Cyrene Northern Necropolis, Norton. dred ‘pin heads’, five with bronze attached; Tocra Southern Necropolis, Tomb "Toc? A (Burton Brown (1948b), 152), ‘eight beads’ gilded, bronze fragments; Benghazi, Dennis Brit. Mus. GR. Inv. 1911 Excavation (Norton (1911), 167) several hun-

1866, 4-15, 210 ‘Berries’ (Dennis (1870), 163); Tombs C and A (Dent (1983), 183, Fig. 14 no. 121;

195 no. 150) found with ii or separately; Cyrenaica,

Bourville Louvre Inv. MN. 690 with vii.

Buds

Flowers Fruit. 0.010

m.

0.007 m

0.003 m

304

305

32

1

a

16

62.

2

c d

31

6

c

39

e

-

25

66.

357

d

Total Seeds Glass Stones

LVI

a

— b

2

f 8

Published Total Combined Total

--b

58

6

6c

15

M.744

2

31

M

Total 194

4 — (Cat, 265-3046) 3 (Cat. 35-3048) 8 Untraced 145 438.

Published Total 453

RESTORED EXAMPLES for comparison:

Alexandria, Graeco-Roman Museum Inv. 19333 fragment: i. Ae tube around piece of wood, on which i, ix are fixed in clusters. i , Ae lancet shaped leaf, base close to main stem, spray of five leaves radiates from hole in side of i, the fruit ix placed in interstices. L. 0.055, W. 0.012 m approx. ix. Te fruit ovoid, white coating and gilding. 1. 0.008 m on wire Dia. 0.002m. Comment: In a Faiyumic portrait Eirene, daughter of Silanos, wears such a wreath (Pagenstecher Inv. 16152

XXII M. 304

Comment: Only full description by Rowe states "remains of artificial wreaths consisting of wire and leaves of gilded bronze, and of 420 artificial berries together with a few small flower petals and rosettes all made of gilded faience'(Rowe (1956), 5). This combines 744 with the rest of the wreath, but the quantity given as 339 in the publication may have been mistead from the Register as 399, rounded up τὸ 400, then again misread as 420.

(1923) 8, 9 Taf. VIID.

TABLE of Terracotta Constituents vii

Assemblage

4th - 308, 246-222, 145-116 B.C.; 744a-c associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C.1.

(Breccia (1912),

167-168 Figs.

90-91

Tav. XXVI47 no. 526). ‘Wreath around neck of hydria, as i, ii and ix. i, Ae tube containing piece of flexible wood or reed, meets behind passing through loop of main handle. Ends show 0,002m hole forced through, around which point are organic fibres, probably cord used in fastening wreath, (Olyntbus X, 158 Pl. XXIII no. 505), coin late 5th — early 4th cent. B.C. i, Ae tube, L. 0.300, Dia. ii, Ae 150 leaves L. 0.0:

004 m. .014 m, largest most

common. vii, Te 60 buds, incised cross and neck, white coating, gilding, L. 0.006-0.004 m. viii Tc 55 rosettes, pentafoil, central bead, Dia.0.005 m.

3»

(304a-e associated coins (Cat. 16-3114, b, c) late

13. Sewing Needles Figs. 395-397

i, 1081a Small round eye, round-headed, tapering to point. L. 0.058 Th. 0.005 m.

597 Other: H. ΠῚ. 4 v, 1093 Examples: (Delos XVIII, 265 PLLXXXII, 702) ii, 1092d-f Fragments as i, small oval eye.

iii. 1080 Fragments, large oval eye, squared head,

i. 1024 Enclosure N. 81-B obv. — illegiblerev, - illegibleAR Dia. 7 mm Th. 2mm Comment: The types cannot be distinguished Such tiny silver pieces were struck at Cyrene on several occasions during this period.

14, Small Rings Fig. 329

Ca, 325-313 BC.

i, 321c Purpose unclear. Dia. 0.010 Th. 0.002 m. Other: H. IIL4 ix with wreath (Cat. 11-1081d oth. er.

i.1047 Near Sarcophagus N. 81-1

15. Nails and Studs Fig. 397

i, 10921 Nail, head broad convex disk, shank square-section, end clenched over. i , 1092m Tack, head small flat disk, shank square-section. Others: 561, H. IL5 xx, xxi. iii, 1092n Nail, head inverted cone shape, shank asi. iv. 1092k Stud, head as i, shank short, square -

section. Other: 1092.

16. Numismatics Report by Prof. T.V. Buttrey Surviving Coins i-xii Figs.317, 323, 370, 376, 386, 392, 406

obv. Head of Athena r. rev. Double Silphium AE Dia. 14 mm Th. 2mm (BMC Cyr 202-203) Examples: Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary (Buttrey nos. 131-132).

Prolemy IV Philopator - Prolemy VI Philometor 222-163 B.C.

176 Cassels Tomb E. 160 obv Head of Ptolemy Soter r. rev. Head of Libya r.; below chin, single cornucopia ΒΑΣΙΛΈΩΣ IITOAEMAIOY AE Dia.Dmm Th. 1mm (BMC Cyr 46) Examples: Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary (Buttrey no. 244-252, 260-265). Ptolemy VII Euergetes II as king in Egypt 145-116 B.C. iv.1151Enclosure N. 81-KK

obv. Head of Zeus Ammon r.

rev. Eagle |. on fulmen. From lower 1.

EYEPTETOY BAXIAEQX Identification of the following twelve coins is AE Dia. 14mm Th. 2.5mm (BMCPtol 95, 85 based on casts made after partial cleaning. Because no eponym) of the lack of suitable equipment their weight could Examples: Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary (Buttrey not be taken, but measurements were done by ver: nier. The nine Greek coins are all from the mint of nos. 306-350). Cyrene, two Sth-3rd century B.C., the others late Prolemy VIII Euergetes II or Ptolemy IX Soter IT Ptolemaic; the Roman coins are all 4th century A.D. 146-80 B.C. Only one Greek coin, ii is sharp; the types of most of the rest can be distinguished, but it is impossible v. 853 SarcophagusN. 82-5 to be specific. Three, i, viii and ix, are illegible alobv. Head of Zeus Ammon r. though their module and context justify the general rev. Eagle |. on fulmen. attribution. One of the three Roman coins is clearly AE Dia. 12mm Th. 3.5mm (BMC Ptol 95,85) Constans; the obverses of the others seem of the Examples: Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary (Buttrey same period, as does the module, except that the re- nos. 458-541). verse types cannot be read. The catalogue notes only those legends actually now legible, although Ptolemy IX Soter II or Ptolemy Apion 116-96 BC. many originally bore a legend.

598 vi.910

Enclosure N.82

bv. Head of Zeus Ammonr. rev. Isiac headdress AE Dia. 11 x 14mm Th3mm (BMC Ptol 108, 51-56)

Examples: no. 624-725).

Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary (Buttrey

vii.1023 Enclosure N. 81-B

Types similar: cf vi. AE Dia. 1mm Th. 2.5mm (BMC Ptol 108, 5156)

Late 2nd — early 1st cent. B.C.

xii. Unprovenanced 1957 Season. b. Typessimilar: cf xi. AE Dia. 15mm Th. 1.5mm Published Coins Healy i-iii,

i-xi i

Figs. 327, 336, 338, 339, 340, 343, 344, 345, 367 The identified coins in Healy’s catalogue have been untraced since publication (Rowe II, 29-32). Enquiries made regarding casts and their where abouts were inconclusive (ibid 30 n14, 33 Appendix A). Accordingly, the following comments and revised dating are given in the same order as originally

published.

1955 Season

vili 854 Sarcophagus N. 82-5 AE Dia. 10mm Th. 3mm

Comment: Small Ptolemaic bronzes, type unascertainable — Soter/Libya, Ammon/eagle or Ammon /lsiac headdress, Late Ptolemaic attribution certain from size, shape and association with v. ix.1148Enclosure N. 81-KK AE Dia. 9-11mm Th. 2mm

Comment: Types similar: cf vl. ‘Roman Empire, Constans Augustus 337-350 A.D.

x. 246 Cassels’ Tomb N. 197 loc2 bv. Bust of Constans r. CONSTANS - PF AVG rev. Two soldiers with one standard. Mintmark SMALB. Probably Alexandria. 340-345 A.D. AE follis Dia.14.5mm Th.1mm. (RIC 8, 539-40.20-21 and 25-25A)

Comment: Mintmark not entirely legible but likely Alexandria. Obverse name division occurs on this type contemporaneously only at Nicomedia (rare) and Antioch.

i.

341aCa. 325-313 B.C.

ii, 311bPtolemy III Euergetes, 246-222 B.C.

Comment: The Ptolemy/Libya issues are very complex, making more specific identification tenu-

ous.

ii 311e Prolemy VIII Euergetes II, king of Egypt 145.96 BC. 1956 Season i. 505

Ptolemy III Euergetes, 222-163 B.C.

i, 538 Ptolemy ΠῚ Euergetes, 246-222 B.C. 1539 Prolemy VIII Euergetes II, king of Egypt 145-116 B.C.

iv.541 Constantine II ca. 330-340 A.D. ‘Comment: rev. Healy: "Two soldiers carrying vexila. Confused identification, single vexillum - either Constantine II before he became Augustus or later. v-vi. 574, 808 Not identified

vii 809

Ptolemy Apion, 145-116 B.C.

House of Constantine ca. 3305-3505 A.D.

xi.Unprovenanced 1957 Season a. obv, Bust of emperor r. rev. -— illegible. AE Dia. 17mm Th. 25mm Comment: Obverse style and module make 4th century attribution virtually certain.

Ptolemy VIII Euergetes II or

vii. 448

‘Type similar: cf vii.

ix. 402.

Notidentified

x

421

Ca. 308-305 B.C.

xi

455

First Jewish Revolt 67-68 A.D.

Comment:

Healy:

‘balf-shekel’ identification in.

correct. Description otherwise assumed to be cor rect. xii, 456 Ca. 325-313 B.C.

xiii 458 Late Ist cent. B.C., before 31 B.C. Comment: Lollius not governor. xiv-xviii. Silver coins (Cat. 5-et al).

599 (Macridy (1911), 198 Fig. 8, 202 Fig. 16A) Ae door furniture, form A bosses, ten examples. 20. Straps Figs. 309, 326, 329, 404 Straps i and ii associated with nails (Cat. 20-H. II. 5 i et al), may be Rowe Reg. 303: ‘Nails and frags. of other objects (parts of fittings from wooden coffin). Tron’.

i. H. IL. 5 xxiii Both ends broken, smaller strip adhering by corrosion products, The surviving coins are mainly those from the ii, H. IL 5 xxiv Both ends broken, dishing at one 1957 season (Rowe II. 32). Those untraced are as end. follows: 52-54, 162, 175, 213, 510, 870, 972, 1022. Others: 319 I-n, 560, 570 The two coins Section A xi and xii found in dishie (Cat. 213-857), could be any number above iii. B. i Angle strap with woodgrain on inside, between 870 and 1022, Publication misprint: iv. 1137e Strap terminal with flat-hended nail ‘1148-1151’ should be ‘1148, 1151’ as (Cat. through end. Woodgrain on underside. 102-1149) is a lamp and (Cat. 212-1150) is a bow Untraced Coins, Healy Addenda

v. 82 untraced. Rowe: ‘Rivetted metal’ IRON (Fe) Nos. 17-22

17. Pins Fig. 412

21. Disk Headed Nails Figs. 314, 326, 329

Nails i and iii in association with bosses (Cat. Ph. 300. Nails ii and iv show extensive woodgrain remains. No joinery was recognised, although the nail lengths suggest the use of thick timbers (Thorn 18-144 a-c), based on description and Rowe Arch.

i. 1189b-e (a, fh untraced) Straight with rolled head, recently broken. Four examples (d-g), two heads present (b, c). Head Dia. 0.007 Surv. L. 0.040 Th. 0.002m. Variants Ae: Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary (White (2001) V. 20.2). (1990), 33-34 Pl. 24 no. 206); Apollo Sanctuary, Aruntraced. Rowe: ‘Twenty-three spiked discs temision (Pernier (1931) Fig. 21); Acropolis of Ha- fromi, 145 wooden Iron. Η 6.5 D. 3.5. Rowe Arch. lae (Goldman (1940), 421 Fig. 61 nos. 1-2) complete Ph. 300 showscoffin. wood remains preserved by corroL. 0.215 and 0.210m. sion products. i . 319k Nail, convex disk head, square-sectioned 18. Rectangular Plate Fig. 413 shank, horizontal woodgrain, as L i. 1205 Crumpled, incomplete when reconstrucOther: 20, 573, B. iiti, H. LL5 xxv, xxvi ted flat. Other: H. IL 5 xxii. 19. Spiked Bosses Fig. 314 i, 144a-c untraced. Rowe: ‘Three spiked bosses (iron), with frag. of wood attached. From coffin. Η. 6.0D. 8.4. Comment: Found in association with nails (Cat. 20-145,146). Rowe Arch. Ph. 300 shows three concave hollow bosses, with nail passing through hole in top, as shownin 144c. Variant: Langaza, Macedonian Tomb Tumulus

iii, 146 untraced. Rowe: ‘Thirty nails from wooden coffin. Iron. L. 6.0". Wood remains as i. iv. 319e Nail, flat disk head, square-sectioned shank, vertical woodgrain remains. Others: 49, 66, 81, 2472, 305f, 319a-d, ΕἼ, 567, 852, 1092. v. H. JI .51 Nail, convex disk head, squaresectioned shank end clenched over. Others: H. IL 5 ii-xix.

600

vi. H. IL 5 xxvii Tack, pyramidal head, squared shank.

Comment: Possibly packing pieces placed under doors or cover slabs in the loculi tombs where these have been found.

22. Rod or Chisel Fig. 355

i, 684 bis Rectangular in section, one end flat- SILICA GLASS (Sg) Nos. 28-38 tened, adhering to olpe base (Cat. 85-684. Rowe II 28, Alabastron Fig. 369 PL 11a). L. 0.099 W. 0.008 Th. 0.005m. Associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308277 B.C. Other: i, 834 Weathered fragment, sand core construc: 1268b. tion, combed zigzag decoration mingling the following colours: LEAD (Pb) Nos. 23-27 Key: Yellow Υ LightBlue 1, 25. False Strigil Fig. 383 Blue M Dark Blue D i 983 Incomplete blade, cut edges, curved sectwo trails of Y in relief tion, beaten club-ended tang, pointed tip, the latter From top: D,D,L, M,L, Y,L, M, Y, M, Y, M, Y. a feature of bronze strigil (Cat. 6-861 et al) Examples: Harden's Mediterranean Group I forms 2.3 (BMC Glass, 55, 60-69 Fig. 5 PL IX nos. 24. Model Handled Disk Mirror Fig. 348

i, 624 Complete. Lightly beaten surfaces, handle with decorative pointed leaf-shaped terminal. Disk Dia. 0.060 Handle L. 0.065 W. 0.007 Th. 0.001m.

25. Model Tanged Disk Mirrors Figs. 321, 348, 421

i. 623 Plain, lightly beaten surfaces, no organic evidence on tang for attached handle. Dia. 0.055 L, 0.084 Th, 0,001 Tang Th. 0.001-0.003m. Variants Ae: Cyrenaica, Dennis Brit. Mus. G.R. Inv. 1868, 10-20, 125 Dia. 0.099 Th. 0.001; Mellita Tomb A (Bisi (1970), 204 Fig. 14 Tav. LV.1); (Lindos Y, 148 Pl. 15 no. 409).

i , 211 Tang only, beaten on three sides, the fourth plain, Upper end fishtailed for disk, Th. 0.001m. iii, 1268a As i but tang short, as i

26. Lead Pipe Fig. 318 i, 183 Incomplete moulded seam of flattened water pipe with raised inscription, letters H. 0.09m. Variant: Algeria (Marion (1976), 104 no. 37).

27. Sheeting Fig. 329 i. 318 Flat slip Th. 0.002m, random shapes and

sizes. Others: 206, 243, 1269.

124, 125) mid 6th-early 4th cent. B.C.

29. Balsamaria Figs. 309, 328 ‘Shape I (Isings Form 8)

i. 86 untraced. Projecting rim collar, long cylindrical neck, angled shoulder and narrow bulbous body. Variants: Benghazi (Ghislanzoni (1915), 28 Fig, 15 nos. 45), shorter neck; (Isings (1957), 24) Ist cent. AD. . H. III. 3 xiexii as i, thin clear glass. Example: Cyrenaica, Dennis Brit. Mus. G. R. Inv. 1866, 4-15 219, 220.

Shape II (Isings Form 27) i, H. IIL 5 iv, vi Flared rim, long tubular body and rounded base. Other:H. III.5 v; H. IIL. 23 ix. Example: Cyrenaica, Dennis Brit. Mus. G. R Inv. 1866, 4-15 223, A.D. and later.

227.

(Isings (1957), 41)

Ist cent.

30. Unguentaria Figs. 328-329, 375, 379 Shape I i, H. IIL 5 vii Tubular neck lacking, pear-shaped bulb, thick, pale green glass.

601

Example: Cyrene Northern Necropolis. (Thorn (2001) II. 5.2 Tomb N. 1 Pl. 43)

34. Goblet Fig. 328

fi, 947 Long tubular neck lacking, shoulder con striction, conical body, dark green glass Th. 0.003m. Example: Cornus (Taramelli (1918), 302 Fig. 16).

i, H. IIL 3 xvi Splayed foot complete, conical cup broken. Thin, clear, light green glass. Example: Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary (White (1990) 100 PI. 15 Fig. 4 no.159). Variant: Cornus (Taramelli (1918), 302 Fig. 19). Complete, ovoid bowl above stem.

Shape ΠῚ (Isings Form 82).

35. Beads Figs. 327-328, 370, 375

Shape IT

glass beads were erroneously included with iii, H. TII. 3 x Long tubular neck, outturned rim fruitThree from bronze wreath (Cat. 12-304c-d) lacking, shoulder with slight constriction, squat con- ‘This is morea gilded likely to be part of i, representing a ical body, clear pale green glass. necklace. Examples: Cyrene Northern Necropolis (Burton Brown (1948b), 149 Fig. 2); Benghazi (Ghislanzoni i, 304g, 306 g-h Spherical, small hole through (1915), 28-29 Fig. 15 nos. 2, 3). middle.

iv. 905A/B. a Base fragment, thin clear glass. Probably a variety of iii (Isings (1957), 97-99).

Shape IV v. H. TIL 0 i Complete, outturned rim, double

constriction at base of neck, squat conical body, deep green glass. Variant: Cornus (Taramelli (1918), 302 Fig. 15).

31. Perfume Bottle Fig. 328

i. H IIL 3 xiv Fragment, discoid body, sides pinched inwards at centre, thin, clear amber yellow

glass.

Dia.0.005m.

Dia.0.005m

—Dia.0.003m

2

2

-

304g

Clear

306g

306h

Light blue 1 (opaque) 2 Deep Βίας - (opaque) = 2 Included was a conical jewellery setting in clear deep blue and a small piece of clear green glass. Associated coins (Cat. 16.3114, b, c) late 4th — 308, 246-222, 145-116 B.C. Others: 51, 945 bis.

ii, 905A/B.b Cylindrical, large hole through mid-

dle, clear green glass H. 0.004 Dia. 0.004m.

di . 315g Spherical, small hole partly through body, part of pendant, clear green glass Dia. 0.008m.

iv. 845f Biconical, small hole, dark blue H. 0.009 32. Jug Fig. 328 Dia. 0.010m, probably part of same necklace as 945. i. 317a, H. ITI. 3 xiii Straight neck has pouring lip with surrounding collar rim. Volute handle, oval 36. Astragal Fig. 327 cross-section, connected to rim and shoulder, clear pale green. H. ΠΙ. 3 xv may be base to this vessel i. 312 Moulded, casting-seam around sides, weathered exterior, probably deep blue. Amber example (Cat. 2-1199). H. 0.011 L. 0.019 W. 0.012m. 33. Bowls Figs. 322, 328 Associated coins (Cat. 16-3114, b, c) late 4th-308, i. 317b Folded rim with corrugated trimming 246-222, 145-116 B.C. showing three indentations. Clear pale green. Example: (Delos XVIII PI. 93 Fig. 818 nos. 1-6). Example: Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary (White (1990), 98 Pl. 12 no. 126), second half ist cent. 37. Gaming Counters Fig. 327 AD.

i , 224 Rim, weathered, thick clear glass.

i, 307a-e et al. Spread droplets, slightly domed and flat-bottomed, some with weathered exterior,

iii, H. IIL 5 viii Rolled rim, thin clear glass.

various colours. Associated coins (Cat. c) late 4th-308, 246-222, 145-116 B.C.

16-311a, b,

602 Others: 192, 829 Amber 1152 Blue 307e Clear 307a-c321a,b Dark blue 846 Light green 307d (millefiori) Deep blue 1262

Examples: Cyrene, Artemision Votive Deposit, (Pernier (1931), 204 Fig. 28); (Delos XVIII, 308-309

PL XC, 794).

38. Islamic Coin Weight Fig. 329 i, H. III. 4 x. Disk of clear silica glass with light blue fleck, stamped with illegible early Kufic script, probably anonymous. Incuse Dia. 0.011m, object Dia. 0.013 Th. 0.002m Weight 160 grammes approx. Comment: At Corinth were found three weights, each of one dinar, of Fatimid Caliph al-Mustansir A. H. 426-487/A. D. 1035-1094 (Corinth XII, 334 Pl. 136 nos. 2877-79). These were originally produced by the Egypt Weights and Measures Office, Fustat, and demonstrate the extent of trade in the Mediterranean. Anonymous weights such as that from Cyrene belong to the Umayyad Period (Miles (1948), 23-24). Such small disk weights were produced under Fatimid, Ayyubid and Maimluk dynasties until the 14th-15th century. The introduction of the system of glass weights 'Sanajat Qawarir’ started in ΔΗ. 65-89/A.D. 685-708 by Umayyed Caliph ‘Abd al-Malik (Miles (1948), 2). Examples in the British Museum collections relating to the dinar and its denominations are as follows: ONE DINAR 4.25 grammes. Abbasid period 4.22 and 4.28 grammes.

Earliest example A.H. 86-90/A.D. 705-9

(BMC Stamps, 45 no. 1).

ONE-HALF DINAR 2.125 grammes estimated, 12 examples = 2.1384 grammes. Earliest example A.H. 96-9/A.D. 714-17 and AH. 109/A.D. 727 (BMC Stamps, 46 no. 3). ONE-THIRD DINAR 1.42 grammes. 11 examples average 1.43 grammes. Earliest example A.H. 107-16/A.D. 725-34 (BMC Stamps, 52 no. 29).

CALCITE (Ce) No. 39

39. Alabastron Fig. 313

i, 127 untraced. Rowe: ‘Alabastron. H. 21.4 (0.214m). Also depicted in sculpture Cat. 257-1040, 1045). Example: Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary (White (1990) 56 Pl. 41 n0.408); Ant. Dept. Cyr. (Inv. 676) smaller example. BONE (Oss) Nos. 40-42

40. Pins Fig. 327 1. 310 Flat disk pinhead, small compass hole in centre, One incised concentric circle near chamfered edge. Associated coins (Cat. 16-3112, b, c) late 4th — 308, 246-222, 145-116 B.C. Example: Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary (White (1990) 37 Pl. 26 no. 241). ii, 79 untraced. Rowe: ‘Hairpin, broken. Ivory L.324 (Rowe Il, 27).

AL. Pyxis i, 84 untraced. Rowe: ‘CosmeticPot. Broken. Ivory. Η. 3.4 (0.034m), (Rowe Il, 27).

42. Spoon Fig. 380 i, 954 Circular bowl, squared stump of broken handle. Example: (Delos XVIII, 229 Fig. 255 PL LXXV, 603) round-sectioned handle tapers to a point. ADDENDUM I (Add) 29. Balsamaria

Shape I sings form 8. Example: Tocra RAF Tombs A, E (Wright (1963), 37-38, 43-44 Figs. 56a)

SECTION II

Black figure fragments of Attic Panathenaic amphorae (Cat. 43). The skyphos and bowl (Cats. 44-45) are likely to be Rhodian in origin, based on their fabric, which is the same as used on distinctive model skyphoid cups (Cat. 47), themselves attributed to Lindos. The smaller model size lebes gamikos (Cat. 46) may have an Attic origin, but could equally be Southern Italian. Red figure stemless cup (Cat. 54) and kylix (Cat. 56) are of good quality in the rendering of painted subjects and firing, whereas the workmanship of the others is inferior, including the fired clay, which can be soft. The inferior vessels encompass a large range of pelikai, hydriai, kalpides, kylix kraters, bell kraters, a skyphos and a lekythos. Also included are model vessels such as kalpides, a chous and lekythoi. Relief decoration model askos (Cat. 62) has no practical use except as a toy or a symbolic burial artifact. Palmette stamped stemless cup (Cat. 63) is of the best quality; the range of bolsals (Cat. 64) is not noteworthy, except that M. 599 and M. 689 have identical palmette stamps although they differ in form. The cup skyphos, cup kantharos, baby feeder, tazza and dishies are uncommon. Ribbed vessels are poorly represented by fragments of pelikai and hydriai. The amphora (Cat. 73) can be compared with that found in subterranean Tomb N. 1 (Fig. 86). Exceptional examples are the shoulder oinochoai (Cat. 75) and handleless kantharos (Cat. 76). Coral red is known on only two examples of skyphoi, Attic Shape A and B (Cats. 77-78). Black glazed oinochoai (Cat. 86-658, 1248), stemless cups (Cat. 87-1145, 1291) and skyphoi (Cat. 89-90) are the best quality with regard to firing and glaze. The lidded pelike, hydriai, kalpis, amphora, flask, oinochoai, kylikes, bolsals, kantharoi, bowls, one-handled bowls, dishie, salis and lekanides are unremarkable, except for lekanis (Cat. 99-1254) which was produced with only one handle and may be a waster. There is a plethora of lamps (Cats. 100-110) which fall mainly into Howland types, the most common examples throughout the Cyrenaica being (Cat. 102) which, however, are inferior in quality compared with the others. Of the model vessels the model villanova amphora (Cat. 111) is exceptional in quality.

Athenian Fabric.

Cyr. fab. 1 Hard to soft red-pink, no inclusions, lustrous black glaze predominates, occasionally dull or mottled, Decoration red-figure painted, palmette stamps, fluted and black-glazed wares. Origin Attic based on style. Cyr. fab. 2 Very hard red to soft pink-buff, small inclusions, mainly black, sometimes brown or white, Decoration red-figure painted, Origin Attic based on style. Cyr. fab. 3 Fine sandy pale red, no inclusions, similar to Cyr. fab. 1, black glaze inside sealing porous body. Black decoration over very thin white slip, indicated by bowls (Cat. 45-1166, 1172 bis), model skyphos cup (Cat. 47-1227) and skyphos (Cat. 44-835). Origin attributed to Lindos, Rhodes. NOTES

Calyx-krater (Cat. 51-1177) published by Prof. Maffre, cf (Add. IT). Black-glazed wares: bolsal, dishie and lamp, Tocra Eastern Rampart grave, cf (Add. II).

604 LIST OF CATEGORIES

Black Figure 43.

Panathenaic Amphora (Attic Type Ic)

44.

Skyphos

75. 76.

Shoulder Oinochoe (Attic Shape 3) Handleless Kantharos

45. Bowl Lebes Gamikos 46. Model 2

Coral Red Pr

Red Figure

Black 79. 80. 81. SL 84. 85. 86.

41. Model Skyphoid Cups

A 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55.

56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61.

] uu pides Kalpid Calysckrater Bell Krateres Chous Stemless Cups Skyphos

Kylix (Attic Shape C) i Hohe Model Kalpides Model Choes Model Lekythos Model Squat Lekythoi

Relief Decoration. 62.

Model Askos

Palmette Stamped Gy. Stemless Cup 64. Bolsals 65. Cup Skyphos 66. Cup Kantharos 67. Baby Feeder 68. Tazza 69. Dishie Ribbed Decoration 70. TI. 72.T. 74.

Pelikai Hydriai Kalpides Amphorae (Attic Shape Id) Shoulder Oinochoai (Attic Shape 2)

78.

S7.

pe A A)

(Attic Shape B) Skyphos

Glazed Pdike Lidded Pelike Hydrai Hy Kali Flaskhora (Attic Shape 5a) Oinochoai (Attic Shape 5b) Oinochoai

Stemless Cups 3 — 88. SkyphosCup 89. Skyphos Cup (Attic Shape A) 90. Skyphos Cup (Attic Shape B) δι. Klik (Ati Shape C TW 94. Cup Kantharos 95. One-handled Bowls 96. Bowls 97. Dishie 98. Salt 9. Lekanides 100. Lamps (Howland Type 20) 101. (Howland Type 21b) (Howland Type 21.) 102. (Howland Type 21d) 103. (Howland Type 22a) 104 (Howland Type 22b) 105. (Howland Type 22c) 106. (Howland Type 238) 107. (Howland Type 23.) 108. 109. (Howland Type 24c) 10 (Howland Type 344) Amphora Villanova 111, Mode! 112. Model Squat Lekythoi 113. Model Lamp (Broncer Type IV)

Miscellaneous

1M.

Amorphous

605 46. Model Lebes Gamikos Fig. 351

SECTION II BLACK FIGURE (Bf) Nos. 43-47

43. Panathenaic Amphorae (Attic Type Ilc) Figs. 309, 312, 317, 370 i, 850 Subject A: compass-incised shield of Athena with drapery. Dia. 0.102m. Examples: Merj (cf ref. under iv); Benghazi (Rowe (1948), 35-36 Pl. XII. 1); (Luni (1976), 263) archon Phrasikleides 371/370 B.C.

i. 662, 663 Lid: acorn-shaped knob, slightly inturned rim band. Vessel: loop handle broken in antiquity on angled shoulder, globular body, raised ring foot slightly concave underneath, Subjects painted ovolo around knob, tongue design around lid rim, also vessel shoulder as (Cat. 60-1159) and band of triple volutes. Cyr. fab. 1, mottled glaze lig uid cap. ml. Variant: (CVA Great Britain III, Oxford I, 38 Pl. XLVI no. 8). Late 4th or early 3rd cent. B.C.

fi, 87 untraced. Cassels: ‘rather coarse red clay 47. Model Skyphoid Cups Figs. 416, 420 black pt, & black inside’. Body ‘thin Gram) . Cassels i 1227 Complete. Offset lip on rim, diagonal Arch. Ph. 139. raised handles, globular body, raised hollowed ring Comment: subject A: painted inscription of dedi- foot, central cone underneath. Subjects A,B: thin cation against Dorie column. white slipped background, black painted debased palmette and figure motif (ABV, 581-582) Lindos i i, 1221a-h untraced. Cassels Arch. Phs. 155-158 Group painters. Cyr. fab. 3; liquid cap. 35ml. Comment: subject B: two incised naked discus Examples: Euesperides, info. Michael Vickers; throwers confronting one another with a clothed Jalisso Necropolis Graves CCXXVII, CCXXXII supporter, one female, behind each, (CL Rh. III (1929), 244-245, 248-252 Figs. 243-244); (Lindos 1, 629 Tav.125 0.2599); (Broncer (1938), iv. 177a-c, 186 Subject B: athletes running to left, 212,217, Pl. 50 nos. 24-25). Variant: (Kerameikos IX, 151 Taf. 42,5), incised toes of right foot, followed by lower part of another right leg. Band of tongue decoration, above di. 1259 Complete. As i, but broader ring foot. footring. Cyr. fab. 1, dull glaze. Example: Merj (Ghislanzoni (1915), 46-50 Figs. Cyr. fab. liquid cap. 35ml. 21-22); (Luni (1976), 262 Fig. 31) four athletes run-

ning to left, (ABV, 408,11 Supp. 106) Berlin Painter. Variant: Cyrene, Necropolis

Fig. 27) athletes running to right.

(Luni (1976), 260

44. Skyphos Fig. 369 1.835 Rounded rim, slightly raised handles, globular body, concave foot, hollow cone underneath. Subjects A,B: band of black painted palmettes with white motif between, background and toras in re serve. Cyt. fab. 3.

Others: 824 L. cap. 35ml, 825.

Examples: (Agora XXIII, 288-289, Pls. 104-5 nos. 1571,1577) 490-480 B.C; (Olynthus V, 77, Pl. 51 no.

35) 6th cent. B.C. Variants: (Kerameikos IX, 104 Taf. 38,5 no. 3, 125-126 Taf. 41,2 no. 8); (Vanderpool (1946), 297 Taf. XLVI no. 111) RED FIGURE (Rf) Nos. 48-61

48. Pelikai Figs. 308, 337, 354, 400 i, 680 Wide rim band, strap handles, convex neck, spalled spherical body, ring foot with double groove. Subject A: restored (Rowe II frontispiece). 45. Bowl Fig. 407 Figure 1 naked satyr looking r., left arm resting on i. 1166, 1172 bis Flanged rim with incised line on left shoulder of Figure 2, a woman wearing peplos outer border, concave body, footring lacking. Exte- running r., head turned back to 1. with cap from rior design painted in black: band around top of ‘which ringlet has escaped, holding in left hand tymbody. Interior design: rim band of latticework panon and sash, Figure 3 naked satyr, head turned between two thin concentric bands. Inside bowl, tol, Subject B: Figure 1 faces τ. holding staff, Figure broad band above botanical zone. Cyr. fab. 2 faces 1, both probably wearing himation. AssociVariants: (Kerameikos IX, 172 Taf. 85.1); (Vanderpool (1946), 314-315 Pl. LXII nos. 218-221).

606 ated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C. Elrashedy (2002) no. 61,360 B.C. ‘Comment: Subject A Figure 2, head similar (Cat. 61-1249). Subject B similar (Cat. 52-1098a et al). Example: Budrum (BMC Vases IV, 31 F. 14). Variants: ΕἸ Merj, Southern Necropolis (El Zer-

v. 551 untraced. Rowe: ‘Neck of Attic vase.’ Rowe Arch. Ph. 208. vi. K Painted ovolo rim band.

Example: Cyrenaica, Dennis Brit. Mus. G.R. Inv. 1866, 4-15, 244 (BMC Vases III, 183 E. 233).

da) Tomb D, info. Abdussalam Bazama; Cyrenaica,

Dennis Brit. Mus. G.R. Inv. 1866, 4-15, 77 (BMC Vases III, 263, E. 431.)

50. Kalpides Fig. 325 i, 288 Painted ovolo rim band, form as (Cat. 58-1243, 72-1313). Associated coins (Cat. 16-311a, b, c) late 4th-308, 246-222, 145-116 B.C. Other: 59c

ii. 1098i Painted ovolo rim band, as i Example: Cyrene Northern Necropolis (14.2 Cyrene A Inv. 37/47). i i. 59a untraced. Subject B: Figure 1 lacking, Fig- 51. Calyx-krater Figs. 318, 321-322, 409, 426 i, 1177.3a-4, 1098f Pronounced outturned rim, ure 2 naked athlete looking r., raised left arm holding strigil Figure 3 youth looking L, right hand out- straight-sided, swelling at level of lower band of stretched, muffled in himation, aryballos below. maeander. Subject A: Figure 1 female standing Cassels Arch. Phs. 159,160. Elrashedy (2002) no. 69 looking r., right arm bent upwards, hand concealed in folds of himation, left arm outstretched under hisimilar, late 4th cent.B.C. Examples: Cyrenaica Werry, Dennis Brit. Mus. mation, Figure 2 standing, probably nude male, GR. Inv. 1856, 10-1, 19; 1866, 4-15, 76 (BMC Va- hand outstretched towards Figure 1. Figure 3 lacking. Subject B: Figure 1 lacking. Figure 2 probably ses IV, 265-266 E. 434-5); Elounda cist grave (Karamale, standing, clothed in himation with left hand georghis (1986), 745 Fig. 124) IV Cent.B.C. holding staff. Figure 3 standing nude bearded satyr iv. 595 untraced. Subject B: as iii, Cassels Arch. looking1. with short horns and pointed ears, playing pair of pipes. Handle fragments 1098f in ManchesPhs. 159,161. Example: (Olythus V, 123-126,128 Pls. 89-91,94 ter probably belong to this vessel. Maffre suggests a date of 440-430 B.C. (Maffre (1998), 358-359 Τανν. nos. 144,147). VILVID. v. 430, 432 Subject B: Figure 1 with himation i , 1323 Convex ring foot, similar to i i. Cyr. fab. looking r. Figures 2 and 3 lacking. Example: (CVA Deutschland VI München II, 19 1, mottled glaze. Taf. 83 no. 2). iii, 214, 232, 178 Subject A: Figure 1 lacking. Figure 2 ithyphallic herm looking L, rising from his sa49. Hydriai Figs. 327, 344, 351, 370, 381, 400. cred heap of stones, probably after libation by Figi, 847 Painted ovolo rim band. Cyr. fab. 2, lus ure 1. Subject B: Figure 1 right hand raised. Comment: Shape has been reconstructed from trous glaze. Brit. Mus.G. R. Inv. 1862, 5-8, 1134 (BMC Vases i , 973, 977a, 987 Painted ovolo rim band similar TII, 284 E. 464). Subject similar on skyphos (Chitto i, egg and dart band at junction with shoulder. terden (1947), 106 Pl. XVD); (CVA Deutschland Ring foot graded in two degrees with incised fillet LIV, Tubingen V, 49-50 Tav. 21 no. 2); and other vessels (Ρωμαιοσ (1908), 150-155 Fig. 1-2 Pl. 8). and footring. iii, 1098g Rod handle, palmette motif at junction with shoulder.

52. Bell Krateres Figs. 318, 337, 382, 398-399

iv. (665) untraced. Rowe Archive film, video Event 104. Comment: From Sarcophagus N. 83-BG, upper part of large broken hydria, probably decorated rim band.

ing to r., clothed in himation. Figure 2 lacking. Subject B: Figure 1 standing looking r., himation leaves. free right arm and hand, which holds staff. Figure 2 standing looking 1, muffled in himation. Cyr. fab. 2, lustrous glaze.

i, 1098a, 1177.1, 1334 Subject A: Figure 1 walk-

607

Example: (McPhee (1976), 384 Pl. 85 no. 8, 440-430 B.C.; CVA Deutschland II, Berlin I, 21 Taf. 9no.2). ii. 427-429, 451, 433, 434 Subject A: symposion,

Figure 1 male reclining to r., head crowned with laurels turned to r., right arm playing kottabos (Sweet (1987), 205 Pl. 78; Caspo (1991), 367-382 Pls. 96-100). Figures 2 and 3 lacking. Figure 4 male, mantle around waist, reclining to r. on striped cushion, Comment: Comparative krater (Corbett (1949), 308-309 Pl. 76,2) shows profile as i, footring as v. Decoration: wreath band as i; handle ornament sim ilar to ii which is restored from it. Comparative subject (CVA Espagne II Madrid 2, III-1D,9 Pl. 4, no. 2a, b) similar, Subject A showing four reclining male figures in pairs on two couches separated by standing woman playing pair of pipes. iii, 1098b, 1177.24, b, 1177.43, b, 1307A,B Sub. ject A: Figure 1 walking r., wearing himation, Figures 2 and 3 lacking. Subject B: Figure 1 standing satyr with headband facing r. playing lyre, Figure 2 lacking, probably holding thyrsus. Miscellaneous fragment shows figure looking r, right hand on hip. Cyr. fab. 2, mottled glaze,

stripes and chevrons, looking to r. over shoulder, right arm across body, hand raised. Figure 2 incomplete, reclining against striped cushion, Beneath couch a table with taenia painted white (inset draw. ing). Below table exergue in reserve. Underneath a series of black painted concentric circles and scratched graffiti, iAI[

i.l]KYA..gr

Elrashedy (2002) no. 24, around 430 B.C.

Comment: ‘These fragments were discovered in Enclosures N. 81-AN and AB, the former overlooked by a robbed sarcophagus beating the inscription: ATAQX OZ (IIL 244; Fig. IV. 11.2). Rim offset inside and handles restored from Gallatin cups, where subject is two men wearing fillets and mantles both reclining to r. on a couch. Figure 2 older man with heavy black beard faces L, leaning against vertical striped cushion. Left hand holds a pinax. Right hand raised behind shoulder of Figure 1. (ARV 1278-1280 no. 62), Marlay Group painters ca. 430 (CVA America I, Gallatin Coll. 14, Pl 24 nos. 1-3; Lehmann (1955), 18 Pl. 10a, b nos, 18,19).

i . 1287A As i. Subject: tondo, Figure 1 standing bearded male looking r., wearing himation, holding face almost flat, slightly convex outer face in re- staff in right hand. Figure 2 incomplete, standing, serve. Subject lacking, except for lower band of ‘wearing himation. iv. 976h-j, 1106 Spreading ring foot, upper sur-

macander.

v. 181, 231 Slightly spreading ring foot, exterior deep concave groove above glazed band bordered by margins in reserve, fillet at junction with lower member to flared base; interior shows seating for krater bowl,

55. Skyphos Fig. 421 i. 1263 Convex body. Exterior subject: painted in

survives. Model example (Cat. 59-1300).

black and red, rim zone of tongues above interconnecting leaf motif confined within panel. Examples: (CVA France VI, Mouret Coll, 44, Pl 55 no. 20; Espagne III, Barcelone I, IIT H. 1.26 PI. 16 nos. D, 14). Saint-Valentin Vases (Howard (1954), 194 Group VI no. 7 Pl. 33,14). Variant: Kantharos (CVA Great Britain XVI, Edinburgh, 26 Pl. 26 no. 4) mid 5th cent. B.C.

54. Stemless Cups Figs. 419, 423

56. Kylix (Attic Shape C) Fig. 425

53. Chous Fig. 376 i, 911 Subject lacking, only upper ovolo band

i. 1205B,

1308 Convex bowl on raised moulded

footing in two degrees. Underncath two raised rings, concave between with deep, cone-shaped compass point in centre, Interior subject: tondo, concentric circles in reserve, symposion within (Barker (1985), 212, Pl. 17.11 no. 6). Figure 1 youth, left elbow leaning on horizontal cushion with

i. 1320ag Lip inset, handles raised; lower part of

body, stem and ring foot lacking. Exterior, palmttes between arms of handles, below zone in reserve bordered by tendril and volute motifs. Subjects A, B: Symposion, male figures, order uncerFigure 1 reclining to l on probable couch looking r. towards a kylix, wearing fillet on head.

608

Figure 2 reclining to r. against cushion on couch, followed by Figure 3 reclining to r. with himation ‘wrapped around waist. Figure 4 head without fillet looking r. towards raised right hand of Figure 5, above which is depicted a small olpe. Figure 6 bearded, wearing fillet and himation looking 1., probably resting on couch. ‘Comment: Lack of inside rim offset compares with that of a stemmed kylix (Kerameus VI. 331 Taf. 104 no. 150) rather than a stemless cup, although external profile similar to stemless cup in ‘Temple Collection, but shows rim offset inside as (Cat. 87-1145) and geometric stamped decoration on interior floor similar to (Cat. 63-1098) Variant: Temple Coll, Brit. Mus. G.R. Inv. 1856, 12-26, 96 (BMC Vases III, 131 E.127; Ure (1936), 206 Fig. 3 Pl. ΧΙ no.2). 57. Lekythos Fig. 400 i, 1107 As (Cat. 61-1250). Subject: palmette. Variants: Cyrene Northern Necropolis (I. 4.2 Cyrene B Inv. 48/47; Olynthus V, 173-4 Pl. 141 no. 408). 58. Model Kalpides Figs. 383, 396, 418

i, 1243 Complete. Simple rim band, concave neck applied to vessel, flattened shoulder with rod handies, globular body, moulded ring foot with double groove. Subject: female head looking r., wearing cap and car pendant, as (Cat. 61-1249). Cyr. fab. 1, dull laze; liquid cap. 200m

child with cord around waist crawling to the right towards toy (Cat. 61-1292). Elrashedy (2002) no. 32, late 5th-carly 4th cent. B.C. i , 1329 as i, Subject: girl with bundle walking to 1. towards a table. Variant: Athens, Brit. Mus. G.R. Inv. 1842, 7-28, 929 (BMC Vases III, 316 E. 534).

60. Model Lekythos Fig. 406 i, 1159 Ovoid body, ring foot convex underneath. Subject: neck tongue decoration as (Cat. 46-662). Naked male figure seated on rock looking 1. right arm outstretched, left arm held out and downwards.

Palmette handle ornament, volute each side. Cyrfab.1, dull glaze. Example: Neck restored from (CVA Schweitz II, Zurich I, 61 Taf. 47, no. 14-16), subject similar.

61. Model Squat Lekythoi Figs. 343, 419, 418, 423 Shape I i. 1249 Complete. Conical rim band, flat-topped, internal lip, neck concave, offset on shoulder, plump body, ring foot, underneath in reserve, concave base recessed in two stages. Subject: female head looking r. wearing embroidered cap powdered with triple dots from which a ringlet of hair escapes (Cat. 58-1243). Liquid cap. 55ml. Example: Jalisso Necropolis Grave CLIIT (Cl. Rh. III (1929), 153-157 Fig. 148 no. 5) associated with le-

i , 1244 Complete, similar to i, ring foot differs. kanis as (Cat. 99-1252); (Olyntbus V, 147 Pl. 116, no. Subject: draped woman wearing sakkos looking r., 251; CVA America I, Gallatin Coll. Pl. 26 no. 2). standing before altar. Liquid cap. 155m Variants: Cyrenaica, askos, Dennis Brit, Mus, iii, 1089 Subject as ii. Cyr. fab. 1, dull glaze, Variant: Ant. Dept. Sousa Museum Necropolis Tomb 8, (Goodchild (1977), 124 Tav. XXIV, e Inv. 65.219), 375 and 350 B.C.

iv. 984 Complete, as i, ring foot plain. Surface male seated figure looking r. with himation, left arm outstretched be-

spalled and abraded. Subject:

low fasces, right arm held out and downwards. fab. 2, dull glaze; liquid cap. 120ml.

Cyr.

59. Model Chous Figs. 423, 426 i, 1300 Trefoil rim and rod handle missing, globular body, ring foot concave underneath. Subject:

GR. Inv. 1866, 4-15, 43 (BMC Vases IV, 34 no. F34); Agora (Shear (1973), 365 Pl. 67q) Votive Deposi

ii. 1292 Complete, as i. Ring foot, underneath unrecessed. Subject: obliterated by spalling, child crawling tor. as (Cat. 59-1300). Liquid cap. 55m, Examples: (Olynthus V, 146-7 Pl. 116, no. 250); Brit. Mus. GR. Inv. 1877, 9-30, 37 (BMC Vases III, 341. 677). i i, 1205A Form as ii, globular body. Subject: crouching leopard. Variants: Cyrenaica, Dennis Brit. Mus. G.R. Inv. 1866, 4-15,16 (BMC Vases IV, 33 no. F. 30; Olyn-

609

thus V, 148 Pl. 117, no. 257; CVA Deutschland I, Bonn I, 27 Taf. 25 no. 9),

iv. 1250 Complete as i i. Surface slightly spalled. Underneath in reserve, groove at junction of base with ring foot. Subject: palmette motif. Liquid cap. 30ml.

and outer zone of tongues within three pairs of concentric circles. Elrashedy (2002) no. 22, c. 430 B.C. Comment: Semicircular stamp used on stemless cup, Durand Collection (ARV, 769-771) Hippacontist painter. Examples: Durand Coll, Brit. Mus. GR. Inv. 1836, 2-24, 51 (BMC Vases III, 130-131 E. 125); Athens (Ure (1936), 211-213 Fig. 17 no. 24) 430 BC.

Shape IT Variant: Agora Well (Talcott (1935), 483-484 v. 531 Broken in antiquity. Subject: female head Figs. 5-6, 20 nos. 95,107) 460-440 B.C; (CVA Danelooking 1, wearing cap, similar to (Cat. 112-1294). mark IV, Copenhagen IV, 140 Pl. 179 nos. 7a, b). Example: (CVA Italia L, Palermo IH-1, 9 Tav, 8 πο. 6) third quarter 5th cent. B.C. 64. Bolsals

Figs. 346, 350, 356, 362, 376,

381-382, 415-416

RELIEF DECORATION (Bg) No. 62 62. Model Askos Fig. 364

i 770 Broken in antiquity, small spout and ring handle lacking. Moulded face mask bordered by pair of incised grooves, globular body with plain ring foot. Fabric fine light pink, glaze dull, in reserve underneath, Associated coins (Cat, 5-800, 801) 475-375 B.C. Elrashedy (2002) no. 142, first half 4th cent. B.C ‘Comment: Mask is more suitable in size for a larger variety of askos, the ears and hair being cut away by the grooves, leaving only central portion of face. Example: (Alexandrescu (1978), 93 Pl. 67 no. 612) larger, same profile, face mask complete with hair, spout fixed above forehead; Jalisso Necropolis Grave CLVII (Cl. Rh. III (1929), 159-160 Figs. 152-153) complete, showing handle to one side of spout. Variant: (Agora XII, 159,318, Pl. 46 no. 1183) late 5th cent.B.C. Mask of Gorgon’s head. PALMETTE STAMPED (Bg) Nos. 63-69 63. Stemless Cup Fig. 400.

i, 1098d_ Convex bowl with fillet just above upper neck of raised moulded ring foot, lower member in two degrees. Underneath three raised concentric rings, cushions between. Inside floor stamped decoration, central zone of tongues partly preserved, surrounded by zone of nineteen linked palmettes

Shape I i 754 Complete. Rim offset, handles slightly raised, body straight-sided, concave lower part, light groove at junction with flared ring foot, convex underneath in reserve, two wide bands defined by six incised circles and dot. Interior design small circle surrounded by cross of four linked palmettes within rouletted border. Cyr. fab. 2, lustrous glaze; liquid cap. ml, Associated coins (Cat. 5-800,801) 475-375 B.C. Others: 233, 594 untraced (Rowe II. 25), 1198e. i . 688 As i, rim more upright, broken in antiquity, underneath bands of three concentric circles. Interior design small circle surrounded by four linked. palmettes. Associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C.

i i, 752 Complete, as ii. Interior design small cir cle surrounded by five linked palmettes. Liquid cap. 425ml. Associated coins (Cat. 5-800, 801) 475-375 B.C. Elrashedy (2002) no. 47, 420-400 B.C. Other:

755 Tripoli, stamp not studied. Variant: Euesperides, info. Michael Vickers, six linked palmettes. iv. 753 Complete, as ii, broken in antiquity. Interior design small circle surrounded by palmette cross. Liquid cap. 200ml. Associated coins (Cat. 5-800, 801) 475-375 B.C. Elrashedy (2002) no. 51, late Sth-early 4th cent. B.C. Example: Apollonia tombs (Ghislanzoni (1915), 99 Fig. 49 bis, 49 ter, Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ph. 2470,1247). Variant: Cyrene Northern Necropolis (14.2 Cyrene A Inv. 42/47).

610

v. 653 Complete. As i, rim offset. Interior design horseshoe rosette with palmette cross. Cyr. fab. 1, mottled glaze; liquid cap. ml. Example: (Agora XII, 275 Pl. 24, 53 no. 556) early 4th cen B.C) Shape I vi. 686 Complete. As ii grooved resting surface. Interior design small circle with four palmettes within rouletted band. Liquid cap. ml. vii, 975 as vi. Interior design cluster of five palmettes. Underneath wide band with inner thin circle and dot.

viii, 599 Slightly inturned lip, rounded body, lower part concave, underneath in reserve, ring foot, grooved resting surface. Interior floor palmette as ix, design palmette cross around small circle within band of rouletting. Cyr. fab. 2, lustrous glaze. ix. 689 As vi, broken in antiquity. Interior floor palmettes and design as vii. Liquid cap. ml. Associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C. Comment: Stamp comparisons make viii and ix from the same production centre, but clays used and profiles differ, viii being primitive, ix the devel: oped form

xiv. 1228 Complete. Rim rounded, body rounded, lower part with incised groove, another at junction with ring foot, underneath two broad concentric bands. Interior design small circle of ovolos between two concentric circles, resting on which are five palmettes. Larger example x. Variant: Camirus, Brit. Mus. G.R. Inv. 1864, 10-7, 1602.

xv. 976f Similar to xiv. Interior design band of

linked palmettes resting on circle of horseshoes. 65. Cup Skyphos Fig. 350 i. 657 Complete. Rim curved, outturned body, neath broad and narrow interior design horseshoe Example: (Agora XII, a. 380 B.C. Variant: Agora Well

offset inside, handles upmoulded ring foot, underconcentric bands with dot, cross. Liquid cap. ml. 279 Fig. 6 Pl. 26 no. 608) (Talcott (1935), 487, 522

Figs. 9, 20 πο. 114) 460-440 B.C.)

66. Cup Kantharos Fig. 350 i, 656 Complete, Offset rim, handles curved and twisted upwards, globular body, high moulded ring foot, grooved resting surface, interior design four Shape ΠῚ palmettes surrounded by rouletted border. Liquid x. 1223 Complete. Rim rounded, body rounded, cap. 65m. Elrashedy (2002) no. 113, third quarter lower part with incised groove and at junction with 4th cent. BC. Examples: Pontiamo Necropolis Tomb 4 (Cl. Rh. ring foot, underneath broad band defined by three incised concentric circles. Interior design small cir 1I, 122-123 Fig. 4); (Agora XII, 284, Fig. 7 PL. 28 no. cle of horseshoes which obliterates palmette cross. 684) 340.325 B.C. (Obyntbus V, 511 Pl. 148); (CVA Great Britain XII, Reading Univ. I. 53 P134 no. 7) Smaller example xiv. Liquid cap. 240 ml. Variant: Éuesperides, info. Michael Vickers, mid 4th cent. B.C. three palmettes around circle. xi, 1222 Complete, as x. Body straight-sided, un- 67. Baby Feeder Fig. 421 demeath one broad, one narrow concentric band, i, 1260 Complete. Inverted rim, vertical handle, interior design small incised circle. Cyr. fab. 1, dull horizontal spout, fat body, moulded footring. Deglaze. Other: 1132, 1224 Tripoli xii, 907 As xi without incised groove, undemeath three broad, two thin concentric bands with dot. Interior design band of eleven linked palmettes resting

on circle.

xiii. 976e As xii, incised circle surrounded by five

palettes

sign D nine linked palmettes, inner border of horseshoes. Liquid cap. 75ml. Flrashedy (2002) no. 14, third quarter 5th cent. B.C. Examples: (Agora XII, 161 Fig. 11 Pl. 47 no. 1197) stamps differ, 450-425 B.C.; (Kerameikos IX, 152-153 Taf. 41,3 no. 8). Variants: (Delos XXI, 63 Taf. 49 no. 193); (Olyn-

thus V, 258 Pl. 193 no. 1080).

su

68. Tazza Fig. 357 Comment: Rim band decoration probably as i. 694 Complete. Offset lip on rim, angled wall, (Cat. 49.847). Example: Apollonia tombs Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ph. high footring, underneath one broad and two thin 2470, 1247; Ghislanzoni (1915), 99 Fig. 49 bis). concentric bands and dot. Interior floor design: inVariant: (CVA Deutschland XLI Mainz I, 86 ner zone of small circle surrounded by cross of four Taf. 40 nos. 5-6). linked palmettes within circle of ovolos between two concentric circles, on which rest eleven linked palmettes. Liquid cap.450ml. Associated coins (Cat. Shape II 5:739 to 741) 308-277 B.C. Elrashedy (2002) no. 35, ii, 226 Exterior: flutes well defined, Cyr. fab. 1, first quarter 4th cent. B.C. lustrous glaze. Example: (Agora XII, 293-4 PI. 32 Fig. 8 no. 806) Example: Cyrene Northern Necropolis, Cassels 350-325 B.C. TombN. 1, Ant Dept. Cyr. Ph.E. 632 (1602). Variants: (Thompson (1934), 317 Fig. 3, A7 and 431 Fig. 115, A7) ca. 350-325 B.C.; Spina Necropo71. Hydriai Figs. 309, 313, 325 lis (Massei (1978), 157-158 Tav. XXXVL3 and 249-250 Tav.

LVIIL2), numerous examples; (CVA

Ttalia XIX, Genova V E. g. 5 Tav. 2 nos. 10,11) 69. Dishie Figs. 357, 363, 381 i. 971 As ii but larger.

Interior design rouletted

border, palmette zone lacking.

i 695 Complete. Inturned rim, convex body, incised groove at junction of body and ring foot, grooved resting surface, interior design inner circle of ovolos between two concentric circles, on which rests circle of ten linked palmettes. Cyr. fab. 2, lustrous glaze; liquid cap. ml. Associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C. Other: 189. Example: Apollonia tombs (Ant. Dept. Cyr. Phs. 2469,

1246;

2470,

Figs. 49 bis, 49 ter).

1247;

Ghislanzoni

(1915),

99

dii. 765 Complete. Similar to ii and (Cat. 97-764), underneath three bold concentric bands, interior design palmette cross. Liquid cap 60ml. Associated coins

(Cat.

5-800,

801) 475-375

(2002) no. 126, early 4th cent. B.C.

B.C.

Elrashedy

Example: Tocra, Southern Necropolis Tomb A

i, 287 Rim band in reserve, knife-cut serrated

edge, stamped ovolo, V-shaped darts. Associated (Cat. 16-311a-c) late 4th-308, 246-222, 145-116 B.C. Elrashedy (2002) no. 93, 360.350 B.C.

ii, 93, 92a, b untraced. Rowe: "Parts of Attic bydria’ and also ‘its lid’ (Rowe I, 22). Cassels Arch. Phs. 125,123. Other: 158, Comment: Rim decoration as i.

i i, 130 untraced. Cassels: ‘black glazed, shiny’. Exterior as (Cat. 73-938b). Cassels Arch. Ph. 126, Elrashedy (2002) no. 108, 320-300 B.C. Other: 119. Example: Ant. Dept. Cyr. Inv. 2641; (CVA SchweitzV. 27 Taf. 19 nos.

1-2).

72. Kalpides Fig. 424

i 1313 Tripoli Complete, Simple rim band, applied concave neck, flattened shoulder with rod handles applied to globular body, well-defined flutes, ring foot, as (Cat. 58-1243). 248a, 960.

Others:

187c,

(Burton Brown (1948b), 152 Fig. 2 Inv. 22/47 and 28/47); (Tocra II, 94, Fig. 42 no. 2361); (Delos XXI,

: Cyrenaica, Dennis Brit. Mus. G.R. Inv. 1866, 4-15, 12.

33 no. 828) 375-350 B.C.

73. Amphorae (Attic Type Lid) Figs. 378-379,

61 Pls. XLIX, L, no. 173); (Agora XII, 295 Fig. 8 Pl

403

RIBBED DECORATION (Bg) Nos. 70-76

70. Pelikai Figs. 322, 410.

Shape I i. 1180a, b Exterior: fat flutes alternately raised, ring foot with double groove. Cyr. fab.2, lustrous glaze. Other: 906,

i, 1135 Flared rim, lid lacking. Cyr. fab. 2, moted glaze. Examples: Cyrene Northern Necropolis Tomb N. 1 (Fig. 85; IL. 5.2; Messa, Ant. Dept. Cyr. Inv. 2360). Variant: Benghazi, Wood 1838, (Way (1849), 136-137), graffiti on shoulder, Brit. Mus. G. R. Inv. 1854,

Ὁ 1 (BMC Vases IV, 234 F. 605).

612

i . 938b, 949a Body as examples for i. Decoration: semi-circular stamped border linked by incised fluting. 74. Shoulder Oinochoai (Attic Shape 2) Fig.

78. Skyphos (Attic Shape B) Fig. 421 i. 1256 Vertical horseshoe handle, horizontal handle missing, ring foot restored. Upper band of black lustrous glaze, coral red below. Example: (Olynthus V, 241, Pl. 182 no. 946A).

363

1,756. Trefoil mouth, flared neck, shoulder offset, rod handle, bulbous body tapering to low foot, flat underneath. Border decoration: semi-circular stamps linked by combed cushion-like flutes. Cyr. fab. 1, mottled glaze, liquid cap. ml. Associated coins (Cat. 5-800, 801) 475-375 B.C. Other: 758 liquid cap. 500ml, coin association as 756. Examples: Cyrenaica, Dennis Brit. Mus.G. R. Inv. 1866, 4-15, 1; (Olynthus XIII, 217 Pl. 159 no. 295)

pre348 B.C; Halicamassus Necropolis tomb of Carian Princess (Halicarnassus Studies I forthcoming), info. Dr John Prag. Variants: Apollonia Necropolis (Ivanov (1948), 41, 42 Fig. 45 no. 1); (Agora XII, 60, 244 Pl. 5 no. 104), 75. Shoulder Oinochoe (Attic Shape 3) Fig.

BLACK GLAZED (Bg) Nos. 79-114

79. Pelike Fig. 395 i, 1180b Base, either plain or fluted body as (Cat. 70-1180a, b). 80. Lidded Pelike Fig. 355 i. 681, 768 Lid: downturned rim, concave, knob

top nippled. bous body, neath. Lid: coins (Cat. fab. 1, dull

Vessel: flanged rim, strap handles, bul wide ringfoot, slightly concave underCyr. fab. 1, lustrous glaze. Associated 5-800, 801) 475-375 B.C. Vessel: Cyr. glaze; liquid cap. 1.100 Itrs. Associated

coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C. Elrashedy (2002) no. 39, last quarter 5th cent. B.C.

363 i, 757 untraced. Rowe: ‘Oinochoe.’ (Rowe II Pl. 12a). Associated coins (Cat. 5-800,801) 475-375 BC. Variants: Alexandria, Sciatbi Necropolis (Breccia (1912), 51 Tav. XLIX 79 no. 96); (Agora XII, 60-63, 245 PI. 7 no. 130) 325-310 B.C.

‘Comment: Lid supposedly from Sarcophagus N. 83-BJ and vessel found in adjoining N. 83-BH (Rowe II, 16-17 Pls. 112,123), the former possibly misplaced during cleaning or registration. Example: (Agora XII, 50-51.237-238, Pl. 2 nos. 25.28) late 5th cent. B.C; Pontamo Necropolis Tomb 19 (CI. Rh.II (1952), 141-142 Fig. 19).

76. Handleless Kantharos Fig. 346 i. 601 Complete. Flared rim with groove, two incised bands around neck and one on shoulder. Lower body rounded with incised paired flutes Low ring foot, flat underneath. Cyr. fab. 1, dull glaze; liquid cap. 160ml. Elrashedy (2002) no. 122, after middle of 4th cent. B.C.

81. Hydriai Figs. 330, 400-401

CORAL RED (Cr) Nos. 77-78

77. Skyphos (Attic Shape A) Fig. 343

i. 1116 Globular base, incised groove at junction

with raised ring foot. Smaller example (Cat 82.664). Other: 968

i , 336 Lid: convex with conical-topped cylindri cal knob, spalled surfaces. Vessel lacking i i, 1098c As i , Ring foot underneath in reserve. Example: Ant. Dept. Sousa Museum Necropolis Tomb e (Goodchild (1977), 123 Tav. XXIId-e Inv. 66457).

i. 528 Complete, untraced. Rowe: "Traces of red 82. Kalpis Fig. 351 1. 664 Rim band spalled, straight neck, rod hanComment: Fabric undescribed. Rowe description dies, bulbous body, incised line at junction with misleading.

paint’.

613

raised ring foot. Cyr. fab. 1, mottled glaze. Larger Others: 132, [760, 761 liquid cap. 100m, 762 Triexample (Cat. 81-1116) poli, all associated coins (Cat. 5-800,801) 475-375 Variant: Tocra, Southern Necropolis, Tomb B BC] (Burton Brown (1948b), 152 Fig. 2 Inv. 8/47); Ant. Variant: Apollonia tombs (Ghislanzoni (1915), Dept. Sousa Museum Necropolis Tomb e (Good- 99 Fig.49 bis, Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ph. 2470,1247). child (1977), 123 Tav. XXIId-e Inv. 6-457) ca. 350 BC. Shape IV v. 684 Complete. As iv, no shoulder, body bulbous. Iron rod or chisel adhering to base (Cat. 83. Amphora Fig. 421 bis). Associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) i. 1255 Springing on upper part of neck for han- 22-684 308-277 B.C. Cyr. fab. 1, mottled glaze. dle with three incised grooves at its base. Cyr. fab. 2, Others: 132, 685 liquid cap. 110m, 944, 949b, lustrous glaze. 986, liquid cap. 110ml. approx., 1310 liquid cap. 84. Flask Fig. 370 i. 850 bis Concave neck, remains of two shoulder

strap handles.

85. Oinochoai (Attic Shape 5a) Figs.355, 363, 374, 403

Shape I i. 759 Complete. Outturned rim, concave neck, rising strap handle, slight shoulder, wall tapers, flared at base. Liquid cap. ml. Associated coins (Cat. 5-800, 801) 475-375 B.C. Elrashedy (2002) πο. 64, late Sth-mid 4th cent. B.C. Example: ‘Gaser Mone 6.9.1936 (Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ph. 6499, 2997); (Agora XII, 255 Pl. 13 no. 274), 375-380 B.C.

120ml. approx.

Examples: Cyrene Artemision, Votive Deposit 31, 35) 4th or 3rd cent. B.C; Gaser Mone 6. 9. 1936 (Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ph. 6499, 2997); Northern Necropolis (I. 4. 2 Cyrene A Inv. 38/47; Ant. Dept. Sousa Museum Necropolis Tomb c (Goodchild (1977), 122 Tav. XXIf Inv. 66-461) ca. 350 B.C; Cyrenaica, (CVA France XIII Sevres, 50 Pl. 25 no. (Pernier (1927), 150, Fig. 13; (1931), 208, 212 Figs.

6); (Agora XII, 255 Pl. 13 no. 282) 420-400 B.C.

86. Oinochoai

378, 418, 423

(Attic Shape

5b)

Figs. 350,

ShapeT

i. 658 Complete, Outturned rim, rising looped handle, shoulderless, long body bulbous, disk foot slightly concave underneath. Liquid cap. 40ml. El-

ii, 1131 Complete. Asi, handle lower. Cyr. fab. 1, rashedy (2002) no. 58, late 5th cent. B.C. mottled glaze. Shape IT Other: 970 i , 1248 Complete. As i but squat. Liquid cap. Example: Benghazi (CVA Danemark IV Copen85ml, Elrashedy (2002) no. 56, late 5th cent. B.C. hagen IV, 138 Pl. 176 no. 7); (Agora XII, 255 Pl. 13 Others: 976, 976c, 976k, 1247 liquid cap. 70ml, no. 273)ca. 400 B.C.

Shape IL i i, 880 Complete as i, handle as ii, long bulbous body, disk foot. Cyr.fab.2, lustrous glaze. ‘Others: 188, 1000, 1312.

Shape ΠῚ iv. 683 Complete. Outturned rim, concave neck, rising strap handle, slight shoulder, body tapering, disk foot projecting, concave underneath. Cyr. fab. 1, lustrous glaze; liquid cap. 120ml. Associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C. Elrashedy (2002) no. 78, mid 4th cent. B.C.

1279. Example: (CVA Deutschland XVI Schloss Fasanerie (Adolphseck) II, 47 PI. 88 no. 9).

Shape ΠῚ i i, 1293 Rim flanged, neck restricted, body spherical, disk foot concave underneath. Liquid cap. 22ml. Shape IV

iv. 935 As iii but body more bulbous. Liquid cap Examples: Cyrene Northern Necropolis (I. 4. 2

50ml. approx. Others: 659, 1117.

614 Cyrene A Inv. 39/47); Sladden Coll. (ibid 1. 4. 1); Cyrenaica, Bourville (CVA France XIII Sevres, 50 Pl. 25 no. 9); (Agora XII, 247 Pl. 9 no. 158) 425-400 BC.

87. Stemless Cups Figs. 405, 423 Shape I i. 1145 Rim offset inside, handles raised, shallow convex body, groove at junction with spreading ring foot. Underneath four alternate broad and thin concentric bands and dot. Cyr. fab. 1, mottled glaze; liquid cap. 525m. Variant: (Agora XII, 269 Fig. 5 Pl. 22 no. 483), ca. 450 B.C; (CVA Great Britain III, Oxford 1, 39 PL XLVIII no. 2) 460-480 B.C. Shape II

i , 1291 Tripoli. Complete, inset lip, rod handles with handle panel in reserve. Ring foot underneath in reserve with band and central dot. Matt black glaze Comment: Illustration based on field notes and substitute vessel from Camirus, Brit. Mus. G. R. Inv. 1864, 10-7, 1596. Example: (Agora XII, 267 Pl. 21 no. 459), ca. 425

BC.

Shape ΠῚ

i i, 1144 Rounded rim, handles raised, shallow convex body, spreading ring foot. Underneath one broad, three thin concentric bands and dot. Cyr. fab. 2, lustrous glaze; liquid cap. 410ml. Other: 976d. Example: Merj, Aslaia Tomb (Vickers (1971), 76, Pls. XXIXc left, XXXb), terminus ante quem ca. 425 BC. Variants: (CVA America 1 Gallatin Coll, Pl. 62 no. 4); (Agora XII, 269 Figs. Pl. 22 no. 481), before 425 B.C.

88. (Skyphos Cup) Fig. 333 1.369 untraced. Rowe: ‘Skyphos.’ Rowe Arch. Ph. 204. Liquid cap. ml. Comment: In association with kylix as (Cat. 91-153 comment). Examples: (Agora XII, 276 Fig. 6 Pl. 25 no. 578),

ca. 480 B.C.; Rhitsona (Ure (1927), 28 Pl. XI no.

1Vo); Thrace, Eleonte Necropolis, Burial XVII no. 62 (Leune (1915), 197-198 Pl. XD.

89. Skyphos (Attic Shape A) Fig. 422 i, 1272 Complete. Rim offset, horizontal horse shoe handles, body straight-walled, groove at junction with toras ring foot. Underneath three thin concentric bands and dot. Cyr. fab. 1, mottled glaze; liquid cap. 315ml. Elrashedy (2002) no. 9, late 5th to early 4th cent. B.C. Other: 407. Example: Apollonia tombs (Ghislanzoni (1915), 99 Fig. 49 ter, Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ph. 2469,1246); Eue-

sperides, info. Michael Vickers, (Agora XII, 259 Fig. 4 PI. 16 no. 342), 470-460 B.C

90. Skyphos (Attic Shape B) Fig. 408 i 1175 Complete. Rim rounded, underneath broad and thin concentric bands and dot. Cyr. fab. 1, mottled glaze; liquid cap. 100ml. Elrashedy (2002) no. 12, third quarter5th cent. B.C. Example: (Agora XII, 260 Fig. 4 Pl. 17 no. 361). Variant: CVA France XXIX Rennes, 31 Pl. 27 no. 3.

91. Kylikes (Attic Shape C) Figs. 315, 374 Shape I

i, 153 untraced, Exterior Cassels: ‘three incised lines circling horizontal surface of base’. The ‘reserved area on ‘vertical surface of the actual foot and inside of each handle, a small portion of the lip ofthe cup above it, & some of the bowl below. Interior “One incised circle, diem c:06m’ on floor with compass point. Dimensions ‘diam 0.140 (inc. handles 0.200m), bt. 0.075". Cassels Arch. Phs. 162, 163. Another unprovenanced decorated red figure example dated by Maffre to late Vlth cent. B.C. (Maffre (1998), 356-357 Tavv. L2, IV). Comment: In association with cup skyphos as (Cat. 88-369). (Corinth XIII, 214 Pl. 34 Grave 259.3 and 4) ca. 500-490 B.C. Examples: (Agora XII, 263 Pl. 19 no. 403), 525-500 B.C.; (Delos XXI, 57 Pl. XLVIII no. 136);

Thrace, Eleonte Necropolis, Burial XV no. 57 (Leune (1915), 196-197 Pl. XD.

Shape IL

ii. 879 Similar to i, ring foot cone-shaped underneath. Cyr. fab. 2, lustrous glaze; liquid cap. 310ml. Other: 518, 976a. Example: Camirus, Brit. Mus. G. R. Inv. 1864, 10-7, 1522; (Vanderpool (1946), 317 Pl. LXIII no. 236).

615 Variant: (Agora XII, 264 Pl. 19 no 412), ca. 480 BC.

92. Bolsals Figs. 316, 346, 350, 371, 415 Shape T

(1977),

116-118

Fig.

13

Tav.

XIXd

Inv.

66-439);

Euesperides, info. Michael Vickers; Cyrenaica (CVA Great Britain III, Oxford.1, 39 Pl. XLVIIL4 no. 418); (CVA France XIII, Sevres, 45 Pl. 25 no. 45); (Agora XII, 286 Fig.

7 no. 701) 350-325

(Thompson (1937), 165 Fig. 98).

B.C.;

i. 600 Complete. Rim offset, handles slightly raised, straight.sided, wall convex with filler above 94. Cup Kantharos Fig. 514 toras, footring with grooved resting surface, under: i. 151 untraced. Rowe: ‘Calyx-krater, or cup’. Casside in reserve. Interior: iron corrosion products on upper part of wall. Cyr fab, dull glaze; liquid cap. sels Arch. Ph. 154. 450ml, Example: (Agora XII, 284 Fig. 7 Pl. 28 no .672) Example: Cyrene Northern Necropolis (I. 4. 2 376380 B.C. Cyrene A Inv. 44/47),

Shape II i , 171 untraced. Rowe: Skyphos. Broken.’ Cassels Arch. Ph. 142, i i, 1225 Similar to (Cat. 64-688). Underneath one broad, two thin concentric bands and dot. Liquid cap. 55ml. Shape IIT iv. 1226 Similar to (Cat. 64-1223) but concave at

lower part of wall above ring foot. Underneath as Liquid cap. 60m, Example: Tocra, Southern Necropolis Tomb A (Burton Brown (1948b), 12 Fig. 2 Inv. 23/47).

v. 860 untraced. Rowe: ‘Skyphos. Red base with black concentric circles? Shape IV

vi 655 Complete. Rim rounded, handles raised, straight-sided, carinated convex lower half, splayed ring foot, resting surface. Traces of black pigment on interior, exterior with silhouette of stacking ring. Liquid cap. ml. 93. Kantharoi Figs. 320, 334 i, 200b Handles and base lacking. Cyr. fab. 2, dull ze.

ii, 386 Slightly outturned rim, squat body, raised footring with hollow base. Liquid cap. 90m Other: 131. Examples: Cyrene, Sladden Coll. (1.4.1); Apollonia, Loculus tomb, City Wall Tower IIT (Goodchild

95. One Handled Bowls Fig. 320

i. 200a Offset collared rim, horizontal handle lacking, flared wall, toras ring foot, underneath broad and thin concentric bands with dot. Other: 187b, 976b. Examples: Cyrene Northern Necropolis, Cassels Tomb N. 1 Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ph. E. 632 (1602); (Agora XII, 127, 291 Fig. 8 Pl. 31 no. 776) second quarter4th cent. B.C. Variant: Cyrenaica (CVA France XIII Sevres, 50 PI. 25 πο. 12). 96. Bowls Figs. 320, 322, 376

i. 217 Flat-topped rim, convex wall, incised groove at junction with footrest. Inside on floor is silhouette of footring in glaze dia. 0.060m. Cyr. fab. 1, dull dipped glaze. ii, 200e Rim offset, convex wall, footrest lacking.

iii, 234 Convex wall with ring foot. Dipped glaze. iv. 908 Shallow convex wall, broad footrest. 97. Dishie Fig. 363

i 764 Complete, Rim angled, body convex, incised line at junction with ring foot. Underneath concave with nipple and two small concentric bands. Similar to (Cats. 69-765 and 213-1212). Ligwid cap. ml. Associated coins (Cat. 5-800, 801) 475-375 B.C. Variant: (Agora XII, 296 Fig. 475-450 B.C.

8 Pl. 33 no.

849)

616

98. Salt Fig. 364 i. 766 Rounded rim, concave wall, grooved underneath. Liquid cap. ml. Associated coins (Cat. 5-800, 801) 475-375 B .C. Elrashedy (2002) no. 131, second quarter 4th cent. B.C. Other: 767 liquid cap. 30ml, coin association as 766. Example: Benghazi (CVA France XIII Sevres, 51 PI, 25 no. 24); Euesperides, info. Michael Vickers; (Agora XII, 302 Fig. 9 Pl. 34 no. 937) 350-325 B.C.; (CVA Great Britain ΠῚ Oxford I, 41 Pl. XLVIII no. 40).

99. Lekanides Figs. 351, 357, 397, 401, 418, 422 Shape I

i, 696 As ii, case lacking. Associated coins (Cat. 5-739 10 741) 308-277 B.C.

i . 661A, 661 Complete. Lid: sloped top, conical knob. Case: deep inset rim inclines inwards, handles uptumed, globular body, low ring foot, resting surface. Cyr. fab. 2, lustrous glaze. Other: 1098k. : Apollonia tombs (Ghislanzoni (1915), 99 Fig. 49 bis Ant. Dept. Cys. Ph. 2470,1247); Ant. Dept. Sousa Museum Necropolis Tomb 8 (Goodchild (1977), 124 Tav.XXIV, d Inv. 65-204); Ben ghazi (CVA France XIII Sevres, 49-50 Pl. 25 no.1). Shape II

iii, 1114 As i, lid flat-topped, case lacking. Shape ΠῚ

iv. 1278 As vi, case lacking, probably as v, inside lid silhouette of ring foot in glaze dia. 0.050m. Cyr. fab. 1, mottled glaze. v. 1097 As vi, lid lacking, probably as iv. Cyr. fab.

2, lustrous glaze. vi. 1252 Complete. Lid: downturned edge, vertical rim, knob concave on top. In glaze on lid shoulder, ghost of flanged rim to case Dia. 0.072m, and inside a ring foot as in iv, Dia. 0.040m. Case: convex with moulded footring. Liquid cap.85ml. Elrashedy (2002) no. 38, late 5th cent. B.C. Others: 200g, 966, 976g, 1090. Example: Jalisso Necropolis (Cat. 61-1249 example),

vii. 1254 Complete, as vi. Lid: inside of rim

shaved to fit flange on case. Case: only one handle applied. Liquid cap. 40m! approx. Other: 9776. Shape IV viii. 645, 654 As ix. Cyr. fab. 2, lustrous glaze. Liquid cap. ml. Example: (Olynthus XIII, 322 Pl. 211 no. 636) late 5th cent. B.C. ix. 1253 Lid: disk-topped knob on short stem, small depression in centre, raised border. Case: rib bon handles slightly raised, flange for lid, broad resting surface, nipple underneath. Liquid cap. 55ml. Other: 977¢

Example: Merj Southern Necropolis 1975 (El Zerda) information Abdussalam Bazama, Ant. Dept; (Agora XII, 322 Pl. 40 no. 1222) ca. 375 B.C. 100. Lamps (Howland Type 20) Figs. 343, 400 i, 1110 Raised rim inward-sloping, body straight. walled, base slightly concave. Liquid cap. 30m. Examples: Cyrene Agora (Stucchi (1967), 162 Fig.

179);

(Agora IV, 43-44

quarter 5th cent. B.C.

Pl. 34 no.

149),

first

ü. 529 As i but with rounded wall. Liquid cap. 30m. Example: (Toora II, 64-65 Fig. 26 Pl. 33 no. 2276); (Agora IV, 43-44 Pl. 34 no. 149); (Vanderpool (1946), 334 Pl. LXVIII no. 342) 500-480 B.C; Isthmia Type IV (Isthmia III, 9 no. 38 Pl. 15).

101, Lamps (Howland Type 21b, Broneer Type IV) Figs. 416-417, 422, 425 Shape T i, 1316 Rim inward-sloping, wide filling hole, angled strap handle, nozzle flat-topped and short, body shallow, rounded wall, raised concave base in reserve. Liquid cap. 35ml. Others: 385 liquid cap. 35ml, 408 liquid cap. 35ml, 534, 902 liquid cap. 35ml. approx., 1005, 1134 liquid cap. 40ml, 1317 liquid cap. 40ml. Examples: Ant.Dept.Sousa Museum Necropolis Tomb 10 (Goodchild (1977), 25, Tav XXIg, Inv. 65-2201), coin 480-415 B.C.; Benghazi Necropolis (Ghislanzoni (1915), 24, Fig.10) and (BMC Lamps

1, 286 Pl. 117 Q619-620); Euesperides, info. P.922

info. Paul Roberts; (Agora IV, 47 Pls. 6, 34 no. 169) last quarter 5th cent. B.C.; (Corinth IV-II, 39-42, 135 Pl. Π πο, 64). i , 1277 Smaller thani. Other: 1233

617 Examples: Cyrene, Sladden Coll. (1.4.1); Ant. Dept. Sousa Museum Necropolis Tomb 8 (Goodchild (1977) 124 Pl. 68 Tav. XXIVa Inv. 65-208) coins late 4th, 400-432 B.C., 491-498 A.D; Merj Southern Necropolis (El Zerda) info. Abdussalam Bazama, Ant.Dept; (Tocra II, 97 Pl. 44 nos. 2419, 2420); Euesperides, info. Michael Vickers.

Shape IV 1258, with red/lustrous black glaze. Liquid cap. 15ml. Others: 25, 1113, 1176 liquid cap. 15ml, 1231 liquid cap. 20ml, 1232 liquid cap. 15ml, 1258 liquid cap. ml. Examples: Euesperides, info. Michael Vickers; (Agora IV, 45 Pls. 6, 34, no. 160), first quarter Sth cent, B.C; (Corinth I

, 135, Fig. 58 no .65).

iv. 1281 As iii, but smaller. Liquid cap. 15ml.

102. Lamps (Howland Type 21c, Broneer Type IV) Figs.314, 349, 358, 364, 380, 406

Shape I i. 774 Rim inward-sloping, small filling hole, strap handle raised, short curved nozzle, squat globular body on raised base, slightly concave underneath in reserve. Liquid cap. ml. Associated coins (Cat. 5-800, 801) 475-375 B.C. Others: [699 liquid cap. ml., associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308.277 B.C; 775 liquid cap. ml, associated coins (Cat. 5-800, 801) 475-375 B.C.1, 862 liquid cap. 30ml, 927 liquid cap. 25ml. Variants: (BMC Lamps I, 48-49 Pls. 12-13 Q64; 68 Pls. 22-23 Q112) first quarter 4th cent, BC; (Corinth XIII, 456-462 Pl. 100; XIV, 130 Pl. 475

CL. 2469) third quarter4th cent.B.C.

Shape II i . 773 As i but larger filling hole. Liquid cap. 35ml. Associated coins (Cat. 5-800,801) 475-375 B.C. Others: 985 liquid cap. 25ml, 1233, 1277.

Shape ΠῚ

di . 650 As i without raised base. Cyr. fab. 1, lustrous glaze; liquid cap. 20ml. Others: 187d, [697associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308277 B.C.], 958, 959, 1083, 1094A, 1095, 1276, 1280.

iv. 698 As ii and iii. Cyr. fab. 1, lustrous glaze; liquid cap. 30ml.

Others: (3), (12), 32, 417, 423 liquid cap. 25ml, 494, 652, [776 liquid cap. 30ml, associated coins (Cat. 5-800, 801) 475-375 B.C .], 938a. Examples: Cyrene Northern Necropolis (IL52 Tomb N, 1 bis. 1 Pl. 39; ibid 1.4.2 Cyrene A and B. Inv. 46/47, 47/47, 53/47); Southern Necropolis Tomb S. 80 bis (Beschi (1972), 161 Fig. 19e); Benghazi (BMC Lamps I, 287 Pl. 117 Q622); Isthmia Type IV (Isthmia IIT, 10-11 no. 48 Pl. 15) not earlier than mid-4th cent. B.C. Shape V

v. 1149 As iv, no strap handle, body as viii. Cyr. fab. 1, lustrous glaze Shape VI

vi. 142 Complete, untraced. As ii Shape VII

vii, 958 As vi but smaller, longer nozzle, body more straight-sided. Cyr. fab. 1, mottled glaze; liquid cap. 15m ‘Others: 15ml].

143, 392,

[948,

1084,

1267

liquid cap.

103. Lamp (Howland Type 21d Broneer Type IV) Fig. 340 i. 504 Complete, untraced. Rowe: ‘Lamp, Loop handle‘, Example: (Agora IV, 50 Pls. 6, 35a, no. 181), late first quarter Sth-early 4th cent. B.C.; (Kerameikos XI, 23 Taf. 13 no. 52).

104. Lamp (Howland Type 22a) Fig. 343 i, 540 untraced. Rowe: ‘nozzle missing’. Examples: Euesperides P. 1358 info. Paul Roberts; (Agora

IV,

53

PL

35

nos.

193-4),

second

and

618 third quarters 5th cent. B.C.; (Lindos I, 615 Tav. 121, no. 2553). 105. Lamp (Howland Type 22b) Fig. 333

i. 370 Complete, untraced. Rowe: ‘Lamp’, small angular side projection (Rowe II, xiv Pl.17) Example: (Agora IV, 53 Pls. 7, 35 no. 193) second and third quarters 5th cent.B.C; Isthmia Type IV (Isthmia IIT, 12 no. 74 Pl. 15).

109. Lamp (Howland Type 24c) Fig. 349

i. 651 Complete, Rim inward-sloping defined by deep groove, nozzle flat-topped, long rounded tip, angled strap handle, squat, globular body, base raised with external incised groove, concave underneath, Liquid cap. ml. Examples: Tocra, Dennis Brit. Mus. G. R. Inv. 1867 5-12, 48; Benghazi (BMC Lamps I, 50-51 Pls. 14:15 Q70; 288 Pl. 117 Q624); (Agora IV, 66 Pl. 37 no, 257) first third 4th cent. B.C.; (Delos XXVI, 20 PL. 1 no. 13); (Thomas (1958), 159 PI. 46b).

106. Lamps (Howland Type 22c) Figs. 373, 404

Shape I

110.

Lamp

(Howland

Type XII) Fig. 307

Type

34A,

Broneer

1.39 untraced. Rowe: ‘Lamp. Broken nozzle’. Cassels Arch. Ph. 141. with thin black border, body squat, raised footring, Example: Ant. Dept. Cyr. Inv. 7-66. Section illusinterior central tube level with rim which has thin trated. i. 1140 Inward-sloping rim, inner band in reserve

black line on top. Liquid cap. 20m.

‘Examples: Cyrenaica, Dennis Brit. Mus. G. R.

Inv.1910

3-7,

13

(BMC

Lamps

I, 38-39

Pls.

8-9

Q36); (Agora IV, 54 Pl. 35 no. 201) second and third quarters 5th cent. B.C.

Shape II i . 875 Complete, untraced. Rowe: ‘Black painted above and inside, Red painted below. Example: (BMC Lamps I, 34 Pls. 8-9 023).

111. Model Villanova Amphora Fig. 363

i. 763 Complete. Outturned rim, pair of incised bands around spreading neck, offset on shoulder, applied handles triangular in section, globular body, incised groove at junction with moulded grooved ring foot, underneath concave moulding with nipple. Liquid cap. ml. Associated coins (Cat. 5-800, 801) 475-375 B.C.

112. Model Squat Lekythoi Figs. 418, 423

107. Lamp (Howland Type 23b) Fig. 424 i, 1294 Broad rim band, tall neck, applied strap i, 1315 Complete. Rim flat sloping inwards, wide handle offset on shoulder, globular body, incised filling hole, nozzle short with rounded tip, body groove at junction with ring foot, underneath conshallow, incised groove at junction with small base cave recessed base. Similar to (Cat. 61-531). ring, interior slightly raised. Handle panel and junci , 1251 Complete. As i. Liquid cap. not taken. tion of nozzle with body in reserve. Liquid cap. Example: Merj Southern Necropolis 1975 (ΕἸ Som. Zerda) Abdussalam Bazama, Ant.Dept; (OlyrExamples: (Agora IV, 59 Pls. 8, 36 no. 227) last thus V, info. 180 Pl. 145 no. 469). quarter 5th cent. B.C; (Shear (1970), 211-212 PL 56, C. 5) ca. 430 B.C.; (BMC Lamps I, 47 Pls. 12-13 9).

113. Model Lamp (Broneer Type IV) Fig. 417

i, 1234 Complete, Crudely formed. Rim inwardsloping, wide filling hole, angled strap handle, short rounded nozzle, body shallow, rounded wall, underi, 31 untraced. Rowe: ‘M.31/33 Three lamps’. neath slightly concave, Similar to (Cat. 102-650) Examples: Sidi Khrebish (Bailey (1985), 3 Pl. 1 Fabric hard pink, no inclusions, glaze dull. Liquid no. 1); Benghazi (BMC Lamps I, 49 Pls. 14-15 cap. I5ml. Examples: (Corinth IV-II, 135 Fig. 58 no 65); 065); (Agora IV, 60-61 PI. 36 no. 235) first half 4th (BMC Lamps I, 68 Pls. 22-23 no. Q112) cent. B.C. 108. Lamp (Howland Type 230) Fig. 307

619 MISCELLANEOUS (Bg) No. 114

Hydria Fig. 344

114. Amorphous Figs. 318-320, 322, 325, 381

(551) cf Cat. 49. (Excavation Ph. 47, Rowe Arch. Ph. 208).

i, i, üi. iv. ν. vi

183 Oinochoe frags 1878 2006, d, f 220a,b 227 237

51. Calyx-krater Fig. 409 1177 Subject dated on stylistic grounds to 440-430 B.C. (Maffre (1998), 358359 Tav. VII. vim. Fragment Fig. 367 Bg frag untraced. Scratched with ‘IMAY[’ (Rowe Day Book 1956 fol. 20, Excavation Ph. 48, Rowe Arch. Ph. 207).

ADDENDUM II (Add) Oinochoe Fig. 336 422 Sousa Outturned trefoil mouth, part of rim

and loop handle missing, shoulderless, bulbous body, disk foot concave underneath.

64. Bolsal; 69. Dishie; 107. Lamp Examples: At Tocra, Eastern Rampart Cist Grave 2 contained an assemblage dated to early 4th cent. B.C. (Wright (1963), 44-46, 59-61 Figs. 7, 15). The following artifacts correspond to examples found by Rowe: Bolsal E = (64-754); Dishies C, D = (69-695, 765); Lamp B = (107-698).

SECTION ΠῚ

Bichrome painted vessels are a rarity, being represented here by only four examples, a pyxis and then by model representations of a hydria, pyxis and kotyle, the latter being diagnostic of Cyrene by the numerous examples found in votive deposits (Cats. 115 to 118). Red painted wares have characteristic horizontal broad or narrow painted bands around the body and flecks of paint on the handles. Most examples are in. Cyt. fabs. A-C, but an olpe from Merj is in Cyr. fab. 5, and the small lekythoi (Cat. 127-410, 1174) are ap parently Corinthian examples. Corinthian red slip is represented by only four examples, mainly oinochoai and a kalathos (Cats. 133-135), but probably also includes the collared example which is in a slightly different fabric (Cat. 130-1091). Local red slip tall oinochoe and olpe are in Cyr. fab. D but show a highly fired, thin-walled fabric and may represent an import. African red slipped examples are intrusive. Fine red slipped wares by their forms suggest imports. Black slip is represented in Corinthian fabrics 4 and 5 for lamps, but the miniature hydria and bow! are in Cyr. fab. C, and by their form and fabric compare with the cache of miniatures found by the Roman Baths at Apollonia (info. Hadj Fadlallah Abdussalam and André Laronde). Relief decoration is represented by unique conical vessels, the larger showing an unusual method of manufacture, with the decoration being apparently inserted into prepared holes (Cat. 150). Moulded wares are represented by terracotta iconic figurines and lamps. The hollow moulded consist of male figures, partially nude, recalling those from Norton’s excavations and female heads with poloi, some of which must be protome in local Cyr. fabs. A-B (Cats. 151-153) and a series of female figures in a much more highly fired fabric compared with the above, some standing, another seated nursing a child (Cats. 155-157). Among the solid moulded is a seated figure imported from Corinth in Cyr. fab. 6 (Cat. 164) and another with polos which is very highly fired (Cat. 163). The material is mainly Cyr. fab. A for a standing nude female and an iconic heads (Cats. 158, 160-162). Also featured are a votive plaque (Cat. 165) and zoomorphic and botanical subjects (Cats. 166-168). The lamps are Broneer types XXIV, XXVII and Hayes type Fl in their own particular fabrics Corinthian fabric Cyr. fab. 4 Pale yellow soft to hard fine sandy fabric, no inclusions (Cat. 116-1004 bis; 116-1246), ‘example from Merj (Cat. 126-790 comment).

Black slipped example (Cat. 146-1314).

1174.

Cyr. fab. 5 As Cyr fab. 4 but with brown or black inclusions (Cats. 117-1286, 1287; 118-1229; 127-410, Black slipped example (Cat. 147-1235),

Cyr. fab. 6 Hard buff fabric similar to Cyr. fab. 5 but with some brown or black and white inclusions is used for red slipped vessels (Cats. 133-135) and a hollow moulded Corinthian figurine (Cat, 164-1241), but. mainly for unglazed hollow wares (cf Section IV). Rhodian fabric Cyr. fab. 7 Hard pinkish fabric with some white inclusions, noticed with Rhodian amphorae, which willbe discussed in Section IV (Cats. 177-178). ᾿

623 LIST OF CATEGORIES

Bichrome Painted

Fine Red Slip

115, Two-handled Pyxis 116. Model Squat Hydria 117, Model Pyxis 118. Model Kotyle

143. Bolsal 144 Small Lopas 145. ‘Unguentarium (Short Fusiform)

Red Painted

Black Slip

119.

Pelikai

146. Lamp 147. Model Lamp (Broneer Type IV) 148. Miniature Hydria 149. Miniature Bowl

123. 124.

Vase Narrow-necked Jugs

Relief Decoration

120. Amphorae 121. Narrow-necked Amphorae 122. Handled Vase 125. 126. 127. 128, 129. 130. Dl. 132.

Shouldered Oinochoe. Olpe (Pyriform) Small Lekythoi Handled Bowl Bowls Collared Kalathos Lekanis Unguentarium

Corinthian Red Slip 133.

134. 135.

Oinochoe (Corinth Group i) Oinochoe Kalathos

Local Red Slip. 136.

Jug

137. Tall Oinochoe 138. Ovoid Olpe 139. Hunched Bowl 140. Skyphos African Red Slip 141, 142.

Large Dish (Hayes Form 31) Flat-rimmed Bowl (Hayes Form 107)

150.

Conical Vessels

Moulded Ware 151. 152. 153. 154. 155. 156. 157. 158, 159. 160. 161. 162. 163. 164. 165. 166. 167. 168, 169. 170. 171. 172. 173. 174.

Standing Males Heads with Low Polos Female Protome Heads with Stephane Standing Figures Standing Figures with Gazelle Seated Figure Standing Nude Female Standing Figure Aniconic Head with Polos Aniconic Head with Stephane Aniconic Head with Mantle Seated Figure with High Polos Seated Figure with Low Polos Votive Plaque Rooster Animal Botanical Model Whipping Top Amorphous Lamps (Broneer Type XXIV) Lamps (Broncer Type XXVII, Loeschcke VIII) Lamps (Hayes Type I) Lamps (Hayes Type II)

624 SECTION ΠῚ BICHROME PAINTED (Pw) Nos. 115-118 115. Two-handled Pyxis Fig. 385

i, 1004 bis Lid lacking, restored from Apollonia example. Plain, flat rim band. Exterior decoration reddish-yellow painted tongues on shoulder, repeat: ed on body. Further decoration mainly reddishyellow bands alternating with others in reddishbrown. Decoration similar to model hydria and pyxis (Cat, 116-1246 and 117-1286). Cyr. fab. 4, soft. Variants: Apollonia, Museum Necropolis Tomb e (Goodchild (1977), 122-123 Tav. XXIII c-d Inv. 66.463), coins i 480-450 B.C, i , end 4th cent. B.C. 116. Model Squat Hydria Fig. 418

i. 1246 Complete, Outturned rim, vertical neck, shallow shoulder and squat body, splayed footring. Vertical strap handle at right angles to shoulder handles. Decoration: neck, matt black on upper part and over rim, orange band on lower part. Black tongues on shoulder, two black bands on body bordered by thin red lines at girth. Between these a zone of black digits, each with red border. Orange painted fleck on shoulder handles and band around footring. Decoration similar to two-handled pyxis (Cat. 115-1004 bis). Cyr. fab. 4. hard. Liquid cap. 95ml. Variants: (Necrocorinthia, 336 Group B, Fig. 188; Perachora II, 274 Pl. 112 no. 2620) the latter a

votive deposit miniature example; (Olynthus XIII, 189-190 Pl. 135 no. 206) also a miniature; (Pemberton (1970), 298 Pl. 74 no. 116; CVA Great Britain XVI Edinburgh, 8 Pl. 6 no. 11) early 5th century B.C; (CVA France VII, Cabinet des Medailles, 1 Pl 5 no. 10).

117. Model Pyxis (Corinthian Shape 3a) Fig.

425

i, 1286, 1287 Lid: convex with flared flat knob, string-cut. Vessel: upturned rim, angled shoulder, one handle broken, globular body, low flared base, string cut. Exterior decoration in yellow ochre: shoulder zone of vertical tongues, three bands below. Black band around base. Cyr. fab. 5, hard, Similar to (Cat. 115-1004 bis). Liquid cap. 45ml. Other: 187e li. Examples: Pontamo Necropolis Tomb 6 (Cl. Rh

IL (1932), 124-130 Fig. 6; Corinth XIII, 205 Pl. 33 Grave 224-6) ca. mid 6th cent. B.C. Variant: (Perachora II, 305-6 Pl. 122 no. 3162) votive deposit. 118. Model Kotyle Fig. 416

i, 1229 Complete. Rounded rim, angled body, slightly flared ring foot, string-cut base. Exterior decoration: band of black painted tongues with three yellow ochre bands below and black band round base, Cyr, fab. 5, hard; liquid cap. 12ml. Oth Examples: Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary (Schaus (1992), 27) description only; Artemision (Pernier (1931), 210-211 Fig. 32; Doc.

Ant. Π-Ὶ Tav. XIV

Fig. 14); Euesperides P. 1810 info. Paul Roberts;

(Perachora I, 97 Pl. 29 no. 5) probably 5th cent. ΒΟ RED PAINTED (Pw) Nos. 119-132 119. Pelikai Figs. 347, 380, 397 Shape I

i, 615 Complete. Outtumed flanged rim similar to i, wide neck, elongated body, small splayed footsing, underneath slightly concave. Decoration inside rim, two flecks on handles with two broad bands just below handles on girth, identical to that on olpe (Cat. 126-703). Undecorated example (Cat. 175-750). Cys. fab. A, buff. Liquid cap. ml. Shape II ἢ, 955 Horizontal flanged rim, narrow concave neck, body elongated, splayed footring, concave undemeath, Decoration similar to i but girth bands thinner, and broad band on footring. Cyr. fab. A, hard red, iii. 1094 As ii but rim form similar to that used on kalpis (Cat. 50-288). Decoration as ii but broader bands. Cyr. fab. A, hard yellow. 120. Amphorae Figs. 335, 353, 413, 414, 415, AIT

Shape I

1. 669 Complete. Flared convex rim band, sloping top, incised line at junction with vertical neck, applied thick rod handles, full globular body, incised groove at junction with angled ring foot and resting surface. Decoration in deep red paint: broad band

625

on rim and ring foot, four thinner equidistant bands ‘on body, one double. Narrow wavy line around upper neck, three horizontal flecks on handles. Decoration identical to olpe (Cat. 126-789). Cyr. fab. A, hard fawn, Liquid cap. 3. 050 lus. Examples: Cyrene Northern Necropolis, ‘Cyrene BY sarcophagus (1.42 Inv. 54/47); Apollonia, Museum Necropolis, Tomb e (Goodchild (1977), 123 Tav. XXIIIb Inv. 66.455).

122. Handled Vase Fig. 423 i, 1290 Complete, lid lacking. Decoration thin red. painted bands on rim, at junction of neck with body and two around girth, with a broad band around base. Shoulder handles each have three red painted flecks. Cyr. fab,A, hard red. Liquid cap. 125ml.

123. Vase Fig. 423 i, 1285 Broad rim band, neck offset, squat globui , 405 untraced, Rowe: ‘Amphora.’ lar body, solid flared string-cut footring. Decoration Comment: No decoration known or apparent red painted bands on top of rim and shoulder, three (Rowe ILPI. 12b). thin bands at neck offset, two broad bands at girth, identical to olpe (Cat. 126-703). Cyr. fab. A, hard i i. 1208 Handle broken in antiquity. As iv but yellow, similar to (Cat. 119-1094). rim form differs. Decoration similar to that on (Cats. 121-1257and 124-823). Cyr. fab. A, hard 124, Narrow-necked Jugs Figs. 368, 408 fawn, Shape II

ἵν. 1208a Handle broken in antiquity. As iii but pronounced outturned rim, narrower neck, handles below rim. Decoration as i i. Cyr. fab. A, hard reddish buff, Liquid cap. 1. 400 les. Shape ΠῚ v. 1207 Tripoli. Complete, as iii. Decoration over

outturned rim, three flecks over handles, two thin horizontal bands around girth and broad band on flared footring. Cyr. fab. A similar to i.

vi. 1208c Broken in antiquity, as iv. Rim form as iii but more outturned. Decoration similar to (Cat 121-1208b). Cyr. fab. A as iv.

ShapeT

i, 1173 Complete. Rounded rim, flared narrow neck, rod handle, globular body, rounded ring foot. Concretion concealing decoration, three red flecks on handle. Thin band around lower part of vessel Profile similar to (Cat. 121-1257). Mollusca infestation inside (Cat. 266-745). Cyr. fab. A, hard buff.

Liquid cap. 1. 140 trs.

Shape I ii, 823 Complete. Similar to i but conical neck and splayed footring concave underneath. Decoration similar to (Cats. 120-1208 and 121-1257) and shape to (Cat. 200-840). Cyr. fab. C, hard buff. Liquid cap. 510ml. Others: 180, 191, 125. Shouldered Oinochoe Fig. 422

121. Narrow-necked Amphorae Figs. 416, 420 i. 1208b Broken in antiquity. Rim form as (Cat. 120-1208a), small neck, strap handles below rim, squat body, splayed ring foot. Decoration broad band over rim, thin wavy band around neck with another thin horizontal band below. Painted flecks on handles, two pairs of thin horizontal bands at girth below handles, broad band around ring foot. Cyr. fab. A, hard reddish buffas (Cat. 120-1208).

i, 1273 Complete. Outturned rim, concave neck, slightly raised handle, pronounced shoulder, tapering body, flared at base. Exterior decoration obliter ated. Inside rim three equidistant bands. Undecorated example (Cat. 194-856). Shape similar to (Cat. 80-759). Cyr. fab. A, hard yellow. Liquid cap. 200ml. Example: Apollonia, Museum Necropolis, Tomb 10 (Goodchild (1977), 125 Tav. XXIVE Inv.

i , 1257 Tripoli. Complete. Similar to i but handles differ. Disk rim with two incised lines immediately below. Decoration similar to (Cats. 120-1208 and 124-823). Cyr. fab. A, hard buff.

126. Olpe (Pyriform) Figs. 358, 366, 392 Shape I i, 789 Flared rim, flat-topped sloping inwards,

65-209).

626

shoulder at junction with full pyriform body, splayed ring foot. Decoration red painted band over tim, three horizontal painted flecks over handle and three thin lines below. Identical decoration to amphora (Cat, 120-669). Cyr. fab. B, hard red with red grog. Liquid cap. not taken, Associated coins (Cat. 5.800, 801) 475-375 B.C. Shape II

i , 703 As i but elongated and shoulderless, Decoration red painted band over rim, two broad bands around girth. Identical decoration to amphora (Cat. 119-615). Cyr. fab. B, hard red. Liquid cap. 120ml Associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C.

iii. 790 Shape and decoration as i and ii, with remains of broad band on footring. Cyr. fab. A, fawn. Mollusca infestation inside (Cat. 266-745). cap. ml. Associated coins (Cat. 5-800, 801) 475BC.

Example: (ibid. 140-141, 303 Pl. 53 Deposit 129). 128. Handled Bowl Fig. 413

i, 1209 Complete. Rounded rim, handle tilted slightly upwards from horizontal convex body, flared ring foot, concave underneath. Handleless example (Cat. 129-608). Cyr. fab. A, hard red. Liquid cap. 150ml. Other: 1188.

Example: Euesperides P. 1751 info. Paul Roberts. Variant: Apollonia Museum Necropolis Tomb 5 (Goodchild (1977), 122 Tav. XXla Inv. 65-167) undecorated. 129. Bowls Figs. 346, 379 Shape I i. 608 Complete. Rounded rim, convex body, flared ring foot, concave underneath. Handled example (Cat. 128-1209).

Decoration over rim, interi-

Others: 633, 634 liquid cap. unavailable, [704 of plain, Cyr, fab. A, fawn, Liquid cap. ml. associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C.] Example: Euesperides, info. Michael Vickers. Example: EuesperidesP. 1850 info. Paul Roberts Variant: Merj Southern Necropolis (El Zerda), Cyr. fab, 5, hard, info. Abdussalam Bazama, Ant. Shape II i , 952 As i but with inturned rim and proDept iv. 1048 As ii and base solid, string-cut. zontal bands around fab. B, hard dull red.

iii, handle stump obliterated, Decoration three broad horigirth, one around base. Cyr. Other: 13

127. Small Lekythoi Figs. 335, 408

nounced ring foot more concave underneath. Decoration zed painted band outside rim, two concen tric bands inside vessel. Cyr. fab. A, hard buff.

130. Collared Kalathos Fig. 396 i, 1091 Vertical rim band, flared wall, small disk foot. Similar to small bowls (Cat. 212-1282). Dec-

oration: thin film of red paint on exterior rim band. i. 410 Conical neck, inward-sloping rim, rod han- Fabric hard buff, partly reduced, with large black Liquid cap. 55m dle, ovoid body and splayed footring. Decoration of inclusions. Variant: (Agora XII, 80, 256 Pl. 13 no. 300)

Shape 1

thin red painted bands around girth, base and rim, with two flecks on handle. Cyr. fab. 5, hard. Liquid cap. 50ml. Comment: Shape I associated in Grave 379 with Shape Il. Example: (Corinth XIII, 257-258 Pl. 62 Grave 379-5 and 6) third quarter5th cent. B.C. Shape I

ii, 1174 untraced, Rowe: ‘Light Buff. Two horizontal red lines round belly’. (Cyt. fab. 5).

550-525 B.C.

131. Lekanis Figs. 335, 347, 404 Shape I i, 411 untraced. Rowe: ‘Cup. Handles missing” Comment: Lacks lid, probably convex with inverted conical flat-topped knob. Case exterior decoration unrecorded. Example: (Corinth XIII, 235 Pl. 46 Grave 3203).

Shape I fi, 616 Complete lid, case lacking. Cylindrical knob, angled convex lid wall, vertical flange. Decoration thin red lines around edge of knob, two more on slope of lid and one at edge of vertical flange. Cyr. fab. A, fawn.

627 Example: Benghazi (CVA France XIII, Sevres, 53 ΡΙ. 25 no. 74),

134. Oinochoe Fig. 370 i, 843 Straight neck, globular body, angled strap handle on body, slightly raised. Pronounced knifecut ringfoot. Decoration reddish brown slip. Cyr. iii, 1143 Complete case, lid lacking. Rounded fab. 6, similar to (Cat, 164-1241). flanged rim to receive lid, pair of raised rod handles, Variant: XIII, 130-132, 244 Pl, 52 Grave shallow convex body on ring foot. Decoration five 338-2; 268 Pl.(Corinth 67 Grave 412-9).

red painted bands round horizontal handles, remains of band around foot, two concentric’ red bands and central disc on interior. Cyr. fab. A, hard buff. Liquid cap. ml. Variant: Cyrenaica, Bourville (CVA France XIII Sevres,52 PL. 25 no. 52).

132. Unguentarium Fig. 386 i. 1017 Rim lacking, spherical body with solid flared string-cut footring. Decoration cream col. oured slip with four red painted concentric bands on upper half of vessel. Undecorated example (Cat. 218-1050). Cyr. fab. A, buff, similar to (Cat 123-1285). Others: 979, 1009 liquid cap. 40ml, 1037 liquid cap. 35ml.

135. Kalathos Fig. 414 1217

Rounded

rim, convex

body,

incurved

footring slightly concave underneath. Decoration: dipped in dark brown/black slip. Cyr. fab. 6, hard, similar to (Cat. 230-1245). Liquid cap. 35ml. Example: (Corinth ΧΠῚ, 148-149, 251, PL 57 Grave 360-2). Variants: Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary (Inv. 73-434 and 497. 2), info. John Riley; (Corinth XV.

III, 204 Pl. 47 no. 1095; Olyntbus V, 232 Pl. 178 no. 880).

LOCAL RED SLIP (Sw) Nos. 136-140. 136. Jug Fig. 393

CORINTHIAN 133-135

RED

SLIP

(Sw)

Nos.

133. Oinochoe (Corinth Group i) Figs. 359,

422

i. 1058 Outturned rim, concave neck, fluted rod handle, elongated globular body. Red pigment on upper part of vessel, white slip below. Cyr. fab. A, hard red, Variant: Cyrene Northern Necropolis (14.2

i. 1274 Tripoli. Trefoil rim, high loop rod handle missing. Short vertical neck, incised line on shoulder, globular body with footring. Decoration: thin reddish-brown slip. Cyr. fab. 6, hard. H. 0. 070m approx. Examples: Apollonia Museum Necropolis Tomb 4 (Goodchild (1977), 120 Tav. Xe Inv. 65-161), second quarter 4th cent. B.C. or later; (Corinth

Tomb N. 192 stele cavity Inv. 56/47).

XIII, 130-132, 238 Pl. 47 Grave 327-2; 267-268 Pl. 67 Grave 412-9) 460-450 and fourth quarter 5th

138. Ovoid Olpe Fig. 348

cent. B.C; (Williams (1983), 7 PI. 4 no. 23).

ii. 717 similar to i above, handle broken in antiquity, small hole in centre of base. Decoration traces

of black and red slip. Cyr. fab. 6, hard. Associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C.

137. Tall Oinochoe Fig. 325

i, 283 Flared cim, cylindrical body, undecorated. Form as (Cat. 195-876), red painted fleck on strap handle. Cyr. fab. D, hard red. Associated coins (Cat. 16-311a, b, c) late 4th-308, 246-222, 145-116 B.C.

i. 628 Complete. Rounded rim, flared neck, ovoid body, upright footring. Decoration: red paint on and underneath rim and over upper part of handle. Simi lar to (Cat. 202-710). Cyr. fab. D, red. Liquid cap. ml Others: 629 liquid cap. 60ml, (708 liquid cap.

628 55ml, 709 liquid cap. 55ml, associated coins (Cat 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C.], (1036, 1070 liquid cap. 70ml] 139. Hunched Bowl Fig. 357

i. 691 untraced. Rowe: ‘Black and Red painted. Comment: Probably slipped inside and over rim. Last recorded in photograph of Manchester exAssociated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C.

change exhibition 1957.

good quality red slip. Fabric very hard red, reduced core.

144. Small Lopas Fig. 393 i, 1057 Lid lacking, flanged rim, angled shoulder, loop handles, spout missing, deep rounded base, raised footing. Decoration: red slipped exterior. Fabric hard fine red, white inclusions as (Cat. 143343). Comment: Lid restored from Brit. Mus.

G.R. Inv.

1864, 10-7, 1802. Lack of soot deposit and the Fig. 109 nos. D. 604-605; Kenrick (1985), 119-121 footring on 1057 suggest that this is not a lopas, and Fig. 24 nos. B. 186 1-3); Alexandria, Graeco-Roman may have served as a pyxis. Mus. Inv. 22764, cream-coloured fabric, red painted Variants: Lopas, Athens, Agora well (Talcott slip on shoulder. (1935), 495, 513, Fig. 16 nos. 78,79) 460-440 B.C.; Variant: (Corinth VIL-II, 94, Pl. 56 no. 554). Brit. Mus. G.R. Inv. 1866, 4-15, 33 black glazed with spout and ring foot. 140. Skyphos Fig. 356 Examples: Sidi Khrebish (Lloyd (1979), 281-282

i 687 Complete, rim offset, handles slightly raised, straight sided, inward sloping wall carinated in lower half with ring foot. Upper part of exterior and whole of interior covered with red glaze, the lower third of exterior black glazed. Fabric highly fired fawn, with black and white inclusions. Liquid cap. ml. Associated 308-277 B.C.

coins

(Cat.

5-739

to

741)

145. Unguentarium (Short Fusiform) Fig. 330

1,327 Angled rim band, short conical neck swelling out into biconical body with incised groove at girth, small disk base. Thin red slip. Hard buff fabric, well potted, fine sand tempering. Liquid cap. 10ml.

BLACK SLIP (Sw) Nos. 146-149

AFRICAN RED SLIP (Sw) Nos. 141-142

146. Lamp (Howland Type 21b Broneer Type IV) Fig. 424

141. Large Dish (Hayes Form 31) Fig. 378

i, 937 Plain floor, low footring. Fabric very hard red, no inclusions. Example: (Hayes (1972), 52-55 Fig. 9) early-mid 3rd cent. B.C.

i. 1314 Rim inward-sloping, wide filing hole, short angled nozzle, body shallow, rounded wall, raised concave string-cut base. Cyr. fab. 4, hard,

142. Flat-rimmed

147. Model Lamp (Broneer Type IV) Fig.

Bowl

(Hayes

Form

107)

Fig. 307 i. Tomb N. 383 monument 4 Rowe unpublished. Cassels Arch. Ph. 152. Comment: Stamped rim, palm tree similar to Style E. (Hayes (1972), 171 Fig. 33; 249-251 Fig. 46) ca. 600-650 A.D.

Liquid cap. 15ml.

417

i. 1235 Complete. Small filling hole, rod handle, squared nozzle, Matt black slip over body, somewhat rubbed. Cyr. fab. 5, hard, as (Cat. 117-1286). Liquid cap. 5 ml. Examples: (Corinth IV-II, 132 Fig. 57 no. 39; Corinth XV-II, 260-262 PI. 56 no. 87) second half Sch cent. B.C. FINE RED SLIP (Sw) Nos. 143-145 148. Miniature Hydria Fig. 322 i, 222 Complete. Wheel-thrown, crudely mod143. Bolsal Fig. 330 elled with outturned rim, applied shoulder handles, i. 343 Complete. Rim offset, handles slightly globular body, flared ring foot, string-cut underraised, inward-sloping wall convex at base with sco- neath, Patches of black slip. Cyr. fab. C, hard light tia ring foot. Similar to (Cat. 87-600). Covered in buff. Liquid cap. 6ml.

629

Examples: Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary (Schaus Fig. 14); Apollonia, Museum Necropolis Tomb 10 (Goodchild (1977), 125-126 Pl. XXVb, Inv. 65-213, 214, 216) first half 4th or 5th cent. B.C.; Apollonia (1992), 27 description only; (Doc. Ant. Π-Ὶ Tav. XIV

miniatures; Tocra (Tocra II, 94 Pl. 42 nos. 2369-2370)

Type4; (Corinth XV-III, 324 PI. 70 no. 1875). 149. Miniature Bowl Fig. 384

Other: From ‘Il Santuario delle Nymphai Chthoniai a Cirene’ Pn, A. a I (502), Santucci (2000), 82 Tav. XXXIII. i i, 549 Young male torso. Cyr. fab. A, soft brown. with some grog. Variants: Cyrene Northern Necropolis, Norton Excavation (Norton (1911), 156-157 Pl. LXVI and 166); Sladden Coll. (1.4.2 Inv. 962.2.12)

1, 998 Complete. Rounded rim band with two applied handles, concave body, flat bottom string-cut. Decoration thin oxidized slip on upper halfof body, including interior. Cyr. fab. C, light buff. Liquid cap. 5ml. Examples: Apollonia miniatures, info. Hadj Fadlallah Abdussalam; (Tocra I, 146, Pl. 93 no. 1506-7); Euesperides P. 2084 info. Paul Roberts Variants: (Corinth XV-IIL 312313 Pl. 67 no. 1737; Perachora II. 308-9 Pl. 119 no. 1975-1976);

i. 515 Flared polos rests on wavy hair covering ears with middle parting, indication of dull fleshcoloured slip used over exposed face. Cyr. fab. A, hard buff.

Votive deposit (Pease (1937), 288 Fig. 23 no. 133).

69-264),

RELIEF DECORATION (Rw) No. 150

150. Conical Vessels Figs. 342, 369 i. 525a Large, exterior pronounced lower collar

with central groove, below eight rows of applied disk nails apparently inserted into prepared holes, Cyr. fab. B, soft red, some white quartz Others: 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 155, 525b, 1157.

i , 826a Small, asi, Exterior plain lower collar be. low fifteen random rows of applied disks Dia. 0.004m reaching upper collar, top pierced by hole Dia. 0.014m. Cyr. fab. A, soft yellow. iii, 826b (unillustrated) as 826a, but throwing lines inside, fabric more oxidized. Comment: Purpose unclear, decoration and shape make them unsuitable for bechive nuclei (Jones (1973), 443-452 Figs. 18-21 Pls. 83-85) MOULDED WARE (Tc) Nos. 151-174

151. Standing Males Figs. 343-344, 417 i, 1242 Broken in antiquity. Child, bald head and left shoulder. Cyr. fab. A, hard fawn, reduced core. ii, 537 untraced. Rowe Arch. Ph. 208. Old man, bearded head with moustache, arms at sides, wears himation over left shoulder.

152. Heads with Low Polos Figs. 333, 341,

385, 421, 424

Comment: Figurine may be a female protome represented down to the waist (Cat. 153-921).

Example: Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary (mv. info. Jaimee Uhlenbrock.

i , 376 asi, straight-sided polos. Cyr. fab. A, buff. Other: From ‘Il Santuario delle Nymphai Chthoniai ἃ Cirene’ (406), Santucci (2000), 62 Tav. XXIX. iii, 1306 as ii, flared polos and hair in ringlets reaching shoulders. Cyr. fab. A, hard buff, some sand tempering. Others: 917, 496, 1002. Comment: Numerous examples in various sizes at Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary, info. Jaimee Uhlen: brock. Examples from ‘Il Santuario delle Nymphai Chthoniai a Cirene’(392-392), Santucci (2000), 62 Tay, XXIX. iv. 1001 as i . Cyr. fab. B, soft yellow.

v. 1270 Polos incomplete, resting on closely formed curls, probably a wig. Cyr. fab. A, hard fawn vi. 437 as ii, formalised wavy hair or a wig. Cyr. fab. A, pinkish, Comment: Hairstyle resembles that shown on small limestone iconic half-figure with polos (Cat. 262-1185).

153. Female Protome Figs. 377, 393 i.920, 921 Left hand holding breast, fragment of right shoulder with folds of drapery incised. Cyr. fab. A, hard red.

630

Comment: Head probably with polos similar to left leg exposed, slightly advanced. Fabric hard fawn reduced, small white inclusions. Associated (Cat. 152-515). V. Cyrenaica, Dennis Brit. Mus. G.R. Inv. coins (Cat. 16-31la-c) late 4th-308, 246-222, 1868, 1 , 78 (BMC Terra I, 255 Pl. 134 nos. 938a, b; 390-391 Pl. 200 nos. 1477b, 1478; Olynthus IV, 28-31 Pls. 17-19 nos. 124-172).

ii, 1064 Right hand raised holding fruit. Cyr. fab. A, hard buff. 154. Heads with Stephane Figs. 338, 345, 407

145-116 B.C.

v. 166 untraced. Rowe: ‘Heads of two Tanagra figurines'. Cassels Arch. Ph. 140. Comment: Head tilted to left, short hair parted in middle Variant: Cyrenaica, Bourville (Besques (1992), 42 PI. 14, d no. D. 4238)

i. 1161 Stephane resting on thick curls concealing vi. 450 untraced. Rowe: ‘Frag. of Persephone figuthe ears. Cyr. fab. A, hard pink. rine’. ‘Comment: Numerous examples in various sizes at Comment: Head complete, front part, possibly Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary, info. Jaimee Uhlen- showing a peplos, has broken away below neck. brock. (Rowe II Pl. 130). 155. Standing Figures Figs. 309, 316, 327

i, 566 Standing female wearing peplos with long overfall holding phiale in both hands. Head missing, ‘wings partly survive. Oval-shaped hole knife-cut in back, Fabric hard fawn, white inclusions. Other: 89. Comment: Restored after Tocra example. Numerous fragments of this type at Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary: info. Jaimee Uhlenbrock. Examples: Tocra, Dennis Brit. Mus. GR. Inv. 1867, 5-12, 17,18 (BMC Terra (1903), 270 nos. C. 727,728, Burn (1994), 152 Fig. 3a), smaller, solid

moulded. Variant: Cyrenaica, Bourville Inv. MN. 609, 608 (Besques (1992), 3738 PL 12b, d nos. D. 42264221).

ii, 313a Left arm bent upwards, hand damaged, peplos over shoulder. Fabric hard fawn reduced, small white inclusions. Associated coins (Cat. 16-311a, b, c) late 4th-308, 246-222, 145-116 B.C. Variant: Benghazi, Werry Brit. Mus. GR. Inv. 1856, 10-1, 57 (BMC Terra I, 400 Pl. 206 no. 1522).

313b Left knee bent, under falling drapery folds. Fabric hard fawn, white inclusions. Associated coins (Cat. 16-311a, b, c) late 4th-308, 246-222,

145-116 B.C. Variant: Cyrenaica, Dennis Brit. Mus. G.R. Inv. 1868, 10-20, 1525).

47

(BMC

Terra

I, 400

Pl.

206

no.

iv, 313e Female wearing peplos, short himation,

156. Standing Figures with Gazelle Figs. 327, 344

i, (568) untraced. Rowe: ‘Part of Tanagra figurine’. Rowe Arch. Ph. 208.

i , 564 untraced. Rowe: ‘Parts of Tanagra figurines’. Rowe Arch. Ph. 208, Variant: Cyrenaica, Dennis Brit. Mus. GR. Inv. 1868, 10-20, 3 (BMC Terra I, 188 Pl. 93 no. 709)

157. Seated Figure Fig. 417 i. 1237-1240 Complete, four examples.

Crude

representation of woman with chiton looking down at child resting on lap, cradled by left arm. Fabric hard pink to fawn, black to white inclusions. Variant: Benghazi, Werry Inv. 1856, 10-1, 47 (BMC Terra (1903), 270 Pl. XXXIV no. C. 724). 158. Standing Nude Female Fig. 345 i, 565 Head broken off, waves of hair resting on

shoulders. Standing pose, arms straight, hands with incised fingers resting at side of thighs. Feet together with toenails represented. Cyr. fab. A, bul Examples: Alexandria, Graeco-Roman Mus. Inv. 7809 (Breccia (1934), 17 Pl. TV no. 11) AphroditeIsis; (Besques (1992), 100 Pl. 59c no. D 4488) sec-

ond half 3rd cent. B.C.; Konigliche Museen Berlin, (Weber (1914), 134 Taf. 20 no. 204) shows bracelets on upper arms and ankles.

159. Standing Figure Fig. 377 i, 918 Head lacking, right arm hangs down by side, left atm raised and crooked holding small ani‘mal. Cyr. fab. A, hard red. Variant: Shahat (Pensabene (1988), 124-129 nos.

631 (Olynthus IV, 133-134, Pl. 53 no. 140) 5th cent. B.C; (Olyntbus VII, 66, Pl. 30 no. 247).

21-29)

165. Votive Plaque Fig. 377 i, 916 Heavily spalled surface, subject unclear. Cyr. fab. B, hard red.

160. Aniconic Head with Polos Fig. 339

166. Rooster Fig. 369

i, 459 untraced. Rowe: ‘Frag. of Persephone figurine. H. 9.4 (0.094m); (Beschi (1972), 143-144 Fig, 6). (Beschi H. 4. 4 (0.044m)

161. Aniconic Head with Stephane Fig. 396

i. 1184 Head with stephane. Cyr. fab. A, hard fawn 162. Aniconic Head with Mantle Fig. 378

i, 931 Small head with mantle. Cyr. fab. A, hard

red.

1.542 Comb, beak, wings and tail broken. Crudely modelled, legs represented by cylindrical stand with small hole underneath. Cyr. fab. A, buff i , 837 Complete. Crudely modelled, beak indicated by notch on top surface, concave back, rounded body, tal feathers pinched. Cylindrical base with small hole underneath 0. 01m deep, legs not defined. Cyr. fab. A, hard buff Comment: Some examples at Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary, info. Jaimee Uhlenbrock. 167. Animal Fig. 316

163. Seated Figure with High Polos Figs. 378,

379

i, 929, 950 Head with high polos, torso lacking, probably nude, bare legs and feet in seated position, Fabric hard dull red, black inclusions, reduced core. Variant: Shahat (Pensabene (1988), 123 no. 20) lacks polos. 164. Seated Figure with Low Polos Figs. 338, 417 i. 1241 Broken in antiquity, lower portion miss-

ing. Low flared polos resting on hair parted in middle. Features represented only by nose, rounded shoulders tapering to waist. Right hand cradles bird, left arm incomplete. Throne high backed with side projections and upper part of rectangular seat. Cyr. fab. 6, hard, similar to (Cat. 134-843). Other: 449 Comment: Corinthian wig not apparent although other moulded details the same; lower part restored from Corinth examples. Several examples in local fabric imitating Corinthian models at Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary, info. Jaimee Uhlenbrock. Example: (Anderson (1967), 12 Pl. 6e) without wig. Variants: (Corinth XV-IL, 96 Pl. 17 Class X13; Perachora I, 219-220 Pl. 96 no. 102) Kore Type A;

i, 168 untraced. Rowe: ‘Upper part of vase(?) showing an ape and another animal.’ Cassels Arch. Photos 150-1. Comment: Resembles crouching monkey playing harp, Variants: Benghazi, Werty Brit. Mus. GR. Inv, 1856, 10-1, 53 (BMC Terra (1903), 273,274 no. C. 750; Burn (1994), 150 Fig. 2a); Cyrenaica, Bourville

Inv. MN. 648 (Besques (1992), 76 Pl. 41a no. D 4395). 168. Botanical Figs. 369, 421

i, 1266 Bud, hand-modelled into biconical form, underneath slightly hollowed. Cyr. fab. A, hard buff.

ii, 827 Quince, hand-modelled sphere with incised cross, round hole prodded through to centre from underside. Cys. fab. A, hard red. Example: (Delos XXIII (1956), 281 Pl. 100 no. 1356).

iii. Buds, rosettes and fruit (Cat. 12-304,744),

169. Model Whipping Top Fig. 327

i. K Five incised grooves for holding string on exterior of drum above concave conical point, top sur-

632

face lacking, probably showed concentric circles. Cyr. fab. A, reduced. Variant: (Knossos, 91 Pl. 66 no. 271) 170, Amorphous Figs. 345, 378, 426 i, 928 Incised lines in herringbone pattern. Cyr. fab. A, hard red. ii, 1326 Some incised lines. Cyr. fab. A, hard buff. iii. (572) untraced. Rowe:

‘Frags of Tanagra figu-

rine’. Rowe Arch. Ph. 208. Comment: Cylindrical handle, probably from a patera. Two fragments of a Corinthian ram's head from Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary, info. Jaimee Uhlenbrock. Variants: Ant. Dept. Cyr. Inv. 2360; Alexandria, Graeco-Roman Mus. Inv. 16713 (Breccia (1930), 76 Pl. XLIQ) no. 503). 171. Lamps (Broneer Type XXIV) Figs. 325, 378 i, 289d Handle pierced. Discus rosette motif. Fabric buff, sand tempering. (Corinth IV-II (1930), 80-83). i . 940 Handle pierced, plain shoulder. Fabric hard buff, white inclusions.

Others: 909, 1181

172. Lamps (Broneer Type — XXVII, Loeschcke Type VIII) Figs. 332, 370, 406

i. 1147 Impressed ovolos on border with discus showing leopard with leaf-shaped ear and raised spots walking to the right. Fabric hard fawn, no inclusions, reddish-brown slip on exterior. Variant: Sidi Khrebish (Bailey (1985), 73 Pl. XIV Figs. 7,14 no. 491).

i , 354 Handle partially pierced. Shoulder with rows of raised points. Fabric hard buff, sand tempering. Variant: Sidi Khrebish (Bailey (1985), 79 PL XV no. 543).

iii. 844 Shoulder herringbone, discus with rosette. Fabric hard buff, no inclusions.

Variants: Cyrene Agora Casa XII (Stucchi (1965), 330 Tav. LX4a; Barker (1985), 275 Pl. 22. IX, 2); Sidi Khrebish (Bailey (1985), 107 Pl. XXII no, 739) mid 3rd cent. A.D.

173. Lamps (Hayes Type I) Figs. 339, 372, 384 i, 869 (bis) Unpierced handle, outline of hole, discus shows raised points in between raised lines. Fabric hard reddish, black inclusions (7.5.2). ii, 995 Handle as i. Rim band shows four rows of

raised points. Discus has raised border around botanical motif of raised radiating bands and points. Fabric hard reddish, grey and white inclusions.

i i, 460 Handle as i but undefined. Shoulder plain, discus badly spalled, zoomorphic motif. Fabtic yellow, grey inclusions. Liquid cap. 80m. 174. Lamps (Hayes Type II) Figs. 340, 370, 375 i, 480 Shoulder herringbone design, outer border of pellets. Discus possibly similar to i . Fabric hard fine off-white, orange slip (V.5.2). ii. 506 Shoulder herringbone design. Discus with botanical motif, small filling hole in centre. Fabric

similar to i Example: Cyrene Agora Casa ΧΠῚ (Stucchi (1965), 330 Tav. LX4b).

iii. 897 Shoulder of rays, discus with botanical motif. Fabric hard buff, small black inclusions. Variants: Cyrene Agora Casa XI (Stucchi (1965), 330 Tav.

LX4a; (1967) Fig. 183); Sidi

Khrebish (Bailey (1985), 168 Pl. XXXV nos. 1207, 1211).

ἵν. 851 V-shaped groove on shoulder, discus shows simple raised lines. Fabric hard fawn, some grey inclusions. v-viii, untraced, Rowe Arch. Ph. 185. Similar to i Comment: Lamps v-vili probably referred to as: ‘Frags. Byzantine lamps’, registered as 461-480 in Rowe's 1956 Day Book; the untraced 507 and 509 are published and may represent two of those above (Rove II, 24; IIL. 9.2).

633

ix. 507 untraced. Rowe: ‘Frags of Byzantine lamp showing rear of animal. Light BuffD. 5. 5° (Rowe I,

24),

x. Luntraced. Rowe: ‘Lamp. Late type Byzantine (2). Light Buff. H. 1.811. 8.3? Rowe Il, 28).

ADDENDUM III (Add) 163. Seated Figure with High Polos Variant: A collection of seated figures in the Bourville Coll, probably from Cyrenaica, show variations, one with a low polos, the other on a throne without a polos (Besques (1954), 116 Pl. LXXXIIIC. 201-202)

Untraced Terracotta Figurines

The 1956 Excavation Ph. 47 in Professor Fairman's Archive was captioned ‘N. 83-BF Loculi 1-3 Hydria δὲ M. 563-566, 568-569, 572’. Some of these were found in Sousa Museum by Ramadan al Gwaider. Those seen and recorded bear different numbers from those given above, and have now been given their rightful numbers as known. Hydria - (M. 551) untraced. (Add. II) 563 - untraced. Cat. 151-537 or Sousa (563) 564 - Cat. 151.549 Sousa 565 - untraced. Cat. 156-64) 566 - Cat. 158-565 Sousa 568 - Cat. 155-566 Sousa 569 - Cat. 164-449 Sousa - Cat. 154-568 Sousa 572 - untraced. Cat. 170-572

SECTION IV

Undecorated wares conceal fabrics which could not be readily identified through the lack of thin section analysis, which if undertaken would have damaged a large number of complete vessels; some of these are imports which by their distinctive fabric compare with more decorative examples represented in Section III. This is demonstrated by Cyr. fabs. 5-6 of Corinthian origin, represented here by oinochoai and a model kalpis (Cats. 198-1219; 230-1245) and by a decorated mortar which is in a coarse earthenware (Cat. 184-1182). It is likely that Athenian coarsewares are represented by the casseroles, chytra, unguentaria and lamps (Cats. 189-190, 215-216). The majority are in local Cyrencan fabrics A-D and consist of a large range of pelikai, amphorae, storage bins, mortars, cooking pots, oinochoai, olpai, cups, bowls, unguentaria, lamps, loom weights, model vessels and terracotta grave covers. This fabric is extracted locally from a bed of blue lias containing marine shells, sandwiched between layers of limestone as a syncline of the Mediterranean basin, and can be seen exposed at the head of the new cutting for the road from Apollonia (1.1.0). A preliminary analysis done for Rowe on a pot sherd revealed a mixture of clay, crushed limestone with fossil nummulites and a litle sand (Rowe I, 8). According to Dr. Fadel Ali Mohamed, this clay is traditionally used by the Bedouin women to make pottery. Because of this, identification of vessel forms could be unrealiable if out of context, such as (Cats. 179-359 to 361) which were found in the forecourt of Tomb N. 197 where there were recent hearths, and by their particular shape recall the vessel shown in Porcher's interior view of Tomb N. 83 (Smith and Porcher (1864) Pl. 17). Local fabric.

Cyr. fab. A Hard to soft red, fawn and pale yellow fabrics with mainly black and white inclusions, occasionally brown, red or grey. Cyr. fab. B As Cyr. fab. A but with shell tempering, Cyr. fab. C Hard to soft red, fawn and pale yellow fabrics without inclusions, occasionally with fine sand tempering, demonstrated by the Apollonia miniatures (cf Section III), Cyr. fab. D Hard red with white or black inclusions, fired to a high temperature, showing patches of

red slip - could be imports NOTES

Unguentarium (Cat. 215-328), Tocra Eastern Rampart grave, cf (Add. II)

636 LIST OF CATEGORIES

Undecorated Ware 175. 176. 177. 178. 179. 180. 181. 182. 183. 184. 185. 186. 187. 188. 189. 190. 191. 192. 195 194. 195. 196. 197. 198. 199. 200. 201. 202. 203. 204. 205. 206. 207.

Pelikai

One-handled Pelike Large Knobbed Amphorae Small Knobbed Amphorae Small Flat Based Amphorae Flat Based Storage Amphorae Storage Bin

Lekane Hammer-headed Bowl Mortar Spouted Mortar Carinated Cooking Pot Deep Carinated Cooking Pots Low Carinated Cooking Pot Small Casserole Small Chytra Vases Lids Tall Pyriform Oinochoe Shoulder Oinochoe Tall Oinochoe Bell-mouthed Oinochoai Disk-rimmed Oinochosi Spheriform Oinochoai Biconical Oinochoe Spheriform Olpe Pyriform Olpe Oviform Olpe Biconical Olpe. Carinated Olpe Straight-bodied Olpe Kantharos Goblet ‘Two-handled Cups

208.

One-handled Cups

209.

Handleless Cup

213. 214.

Dishie Salts

210. One-handled Collared Bowls 211. Large Collared Bowls 212. Small Collared Bowls 215. Unguentaria (Long Fusiform) 216. Unguentaria (Short Fusiform) 217. Unguentarium (Oviform)

218. 219. 220. 221. 222. 225. 224. 225. 226. 227. 228. 229. 230.

231. 232. 233. 234. 235. 236.

Unguentaria (Spheriform) Unguentaria (Globular) Lamps (Broneer Type IV) Lamp (Howland Type 30C) Lamps Lamp (Broneer Type VII) Lamps (Broneer Type VIII) Lamp (Howland Type 32, Broncer Type XII) Lamp (Howland Type 40A) Loom Weights (Pyramidal) Loom Weights (Discoid)

Unguentaria (Carinated)

Model Kalpis

Model Shoulder Oinochoe Model Spheriform Oinochoe Model Collared Bowls Model Vessels Terracotta Grave Covers. Earthenware Tiles

Addendum IV Lamp (Howland Type 21c, Broneer Type IV)

67 Other: 962 Examples: Tocra, Southern Necropolis Tomb A (Burton Brown (1948b), 152 Fig. 2 Inv. 15/47); Benghazi, Sidi Khrebish (Lloyd (1979), 119-120 Fig, 68 nos. D. 1, D. 2); Athens, Agora Well (Talcott (1935), 495, 514 Figs. 17 no. 85) 460-440 B.C.

SECTION IV UNDECORATED WARE (Uw) Nos.

175-236

175. Pelikai Figs. 311, 355, 371, 373

Shape I i, 117 untraced. Rowe: ‘Pelike with lid.’ Rowe Arch. Ph. 266.

i , 855 Complete. Rim collar flanged inside for lid seating, wide straight neck, strap handle, squat bulbous body, low ring foot. Cyr. fab. A, buff. Liquid cap. 1. 050 ltrs. Other: 933. Example: Apollonia Museum Necropolis Tomb 8 (Goodchild (1977), 124 Tav XXIVb Inv. 65. 228) Variant: (Agora XII, 338 Pl. 62 no.

amphora ca. 500-480 B.C.

1470) table

ji, 806 untraced. Rowe: ‘Amphora handle with partly defaced sealing’. Rowe Arch. Ph. 206. Other: 373 ‘Comment: two line eponym unclear, Shape IT iv. 745 Complete. Angled outturned rim, wide straight-sided neck, rod handles, angled shoulders, ovoid body, rounded knob at base. Contained mollusca infestation (Cat. 266-745). Fabric smooth pink, no inclusions. Liquid cap. 12.400 ltrs. Associated coins (Cat. 5-800, 801) 475-375 B.C. Other: N. 83-BG Rowe Arch. film (video events

Shape II 104,128). i i, 682 Complete. Flanged rim band, offset at base of neck, body not so bulbous as i . Cyr. fab. A, Shape ΠῚ buff and gritty. Liquid cap. ml. Associated coins iii, 362 Rim band, straight neck, rod handles, (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C. Others: 114, [750 angled shoulder, body probably as i. Cyr. fab. A, associated coins (Cat. 5-800,801) 475-375 B.C.], hard but. 874. Shape ΠῚ Shape IV iv. 873 Complete. As iii but angled inverted rim, v. 514 untraced. Form uncertain. Rowe: ‘Cinerary body biconical. Cyr. fab. A, hard yellow. Liquid urn, broken in pieces. Two handled. Light buff. Concap. 625ml, tained ashes of child. H. 43. 0 Dia. 33.0." 176. One-handled Pelike Fig. 365

i. 788A Complete. Outturned rim, offset at base of neck, carinated body. Raised, straight-sided ringfoot. Cyr. fab. A, buff. Liquid cap. 805ml. Associated coins (Cat. 5-800,801) 475-375 B.C. Comment: Form as (Cat. 175-682) which has two

handles. Examples: Sciatbi Necropolis (Breccia (1912), 87 Fig. 43 no. 260); (Agora XI1,204-205) tall necked jugs 177. Large Knobbed Amphorae Figs. 332, 353, 361, 367 Shape I i. 677 untraced. Rowe: ‘Amphora. base.’ (Rowe IL 14 Pl. 7c).

Pointed

178. Small Knobbed Amphorae Figs. 352, 395 Shape I i, 1078 Rim and handles lacking, wide vertical neck, incised shoulder band, ovoid body tapers to flat knobbed base. Fabric hard pink, with some white inclusions. Lime concretion on inside suggests object was lying at angle of 45 deg. Others: (110), 904, (1043 bis); N. 83-BG Rowe Arch. film (video event 111). Example: Benghazi Tomb A (Dent (1983), 144 PL LIV 2,3); Cyrenaica Dennis Brit. Mus. G.R. Inv. 1868, 7-5, 167, larger example with eponym.

Shape II

i . 668 Complete. Outturned sim, small vertical neck, sloping strap handles, ovoid body tapering to

68

pointed base with chamfered edge, hollow underneath, similar to i. Fabric light buff, small black inclusions, quartz and red grog. Liquid cap. 975ml. Other: 872 liquid cap. 1. 055 ltrs. Variant: Camiro Necropolis Grave LXX (Cl. Rh. VIVIL 176-178 Fig. 187).

179. Small Flat Based Amphorae Figs. 332, 362

Shape I

i, 751 Complete, Outturned rim band, strap han dles, straight neck defined by double incised band as a collar at junction with ovoid body, small splayed ring foot with deep groove underneath concave base. Fabric hard yellow, small black inclusions. Liquid cap. 1.150 ltrs. Associated coins (Cat. 5-800,801) 475-375 B.C. Variant: Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary, (av.

73-335), info. John Riley.

Shape II i , 359 Similar to i, but lacking base. Fabric hard buff.

Shape IIT

182. Lekane Fig. 379 i, 942, 943 Flat-topped rim with incised border, wall sloping inwards to spreading ring foot. Low handle attachments lacking. Fabric hard yellow oxidised, white, black and grey inclusions. Variant: (Agora 510-480 B.C.

XII, 364

Pl. 26 no.

1826)

ca.

183. Hammer-headed Bowl Fig. 381

i, 969 Heavy rim, straight body to conical-shaped vessel, base lacking. Fabric very hard red, grey in clusions. Example: Sidi Khrebish (Lloyd (1979), 345-347 Fig. 127 no. D. 928).

184, Mortar Fig. 410 i, 1182 Flat rim with chamfered edges. Exterior: roller stamped tongues L. 0. 032m, below which are two incised bands, three on top. Interior: fine gritty surface. Fabric hard red, black inclusions. Comment: Stamped decoration identical to that on a piece from Perachora, from which the profile is restored. Example: (Weinberg (1954), 129-131 Fig. 2c Pi. 30, )) Variant: Tile factory at Corinth (ibid. 129-130 Fig. 2c), before 450 B.C.

iii. 361, 360 Rim similar to ii, neck taller, body

probably ovoid with raised ring foot, convex underneath, Fabric hard buff, sand tempering, Shape IV iv. 390 Rim and one strap handle missing. Body as ili, Cyr. fab. A, gritty pinkish-buff.

180. Flat Based Storage Amphorae Figs. 341, 392

i. 1043 Complete. Angled rim, flared neck, rod handles, angled shoulder, ovoid body, splayed ring foot concave underneath. Cyr. fab. A, hard yellow (V.19.2). Others: 903, 993.

185. Spouted Mortar Fig. 377

1.923 Probably crushed, Rounded flanged rim inturned, applied bolster handles with incised rilling Flared’ spout with deep straight-sided pouring groove. Fabric soft yellow with black, grey and white inclusions, Examples: (Agora XII, 221.223 Pl. 91 no. 1912) second half 5th cent. B. C; (Olynthus XIII, 414 Pl. 250 no. 1030). Euesperides P. 2081 info. Paul Roberis. Variant: Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary, (Inv. 157. 1), info. John Riley. 186. Carinated Cooking Pot Fig. 323

1,254 Rounded bead rim with flat resting surface for lid which is lacking. Small looped rod handles i. 356, 358 Low vertical rim, wide mouth, ovoid below rim resting on body. Cyr. fab. A, soft red, fine body tapering to splayed ring foot. Decoration of sand tempering. Examples: Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary (Inv. 234, stamped lozenges 0.010 by 0.011m on shoulder. 4), info. John Riley; Sidi Khrebish (Lloyd (1979), Fabric hard buff, sand tempering, 181. Storage Bin Fig. 332

Variant: (Agora XII, 344 Fig. 13 PL 68 no. 1541).

259-261 Fig.

103 no. D. 501).

639

187. Deep Carinated Cooking Pots Fig. 323

i, 250a Flanged rim with slightly raised internal band, convex wall. Fabric hard red, sand tempering. Example: Sidi Khrebish (Lloyd (1979), 250-251 Fig. 100 no. 452) i . 250c Form and fabric similar to i iii, 250d Form and fabric similar to i. 188. Low Carinated Cooking Pot Fig. 323

i. 250b Thick flanged rim, low wall, convex base. Fabric hard red, sand tempering. Example: Sidi Khrebish 103 no. 510).

(Lloyd (1979), 262 Fig.

189. Small Casserole Fig. 378

Shape IL i . 414 Sousa. Complete.

Fine outturned rim,

neck concave, conical body, flat base. Cyr. fab. A, red. Liquid cap. 75m. Shape ΠῚ fü. (139) Rowe: ‘Small pot. Reddish. H. 5.0 D. 6.5. Rowe Arch. Ph. 300. Shape IV iv. (135) Rowe: ‘Small pot. H. 5.9 D. 8.0'. Rowe Arch. Phs. 298, 299.

v. N. 197 loc. 3 unpublished. Rowe Arch. Phs 288, 290.

192.

Lids Figs. 330, 349, 359, 365, 374, 389,

394,397, 425 Shape I

i, 932 Single strap handle, flanged rim to receive missing lid, probably as i. Shallow rounded bottom, lacks soot deposit. Fabric hard fawn, slightly rei, 1321 Complete. Straight-sided knob, convex duced core, white and black inclusions. wall, rounded rim. Cyr. fab. A, hard red. Example: Agora (Young (1951), 114-115 Pl. 50 no. 8). ShapeI ii, 924 Complete as i but handleless, lacks soot fi, 1033 Complete. High splayed flat-topped deposit. Lid convex with cylindrical knob with in knob, convex body, bead-rimmed flange. Similar to cised circle. Fabric hard red with black, grey and bowl shape (Cat. 212-606). Cyr. fab. A, hard dull white inclusions. Liquid cap. 45ml. to inside of red. flange. Shape III

190. Small Chytra Fig. 349, 414

i i, 720 Complete. High concave flat-topped knob, body flatter with fillet by flattened rim. Cyr. fab. A, fawn. Associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C. Example: Cyrene, Sladden Coll. (1.4.1)

i, 1221 Outturned sim, applied rod handle on shoulder, deep rounded base lacking soot deposit. Large hole caused through spalling (Rowe II Pl. 24b). Fabric hard buff, black and white inclusions. Liquid cap, 155ml. approx. Examples: Alexandria, Sciatbi Necropolis (Brec- Shape IV iv. 883 Complete. Similar to iii but with angled cia (1912), 89 Fig. 48 no. 271); (Young (1951), 115 rim band. Cyr. fab. A, hard buff PI. 50, no. 7). i . 646 untraced. Rowe: "Vase, light buff’ (RoweII PI. 9b). 191. Vases Figs. 309, 313-314, 336

Shape I i. 415 Sousa, Complete. Splayed rim, squat globular body, raised footring. Cyr. fab. B, buff. Liquid cap. 75m.

Others: [724 associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C.], 884,885.

Shape V v. 722 Complete. Low splayed knob, angled wall and rim band similar in shape to small bowls (Cat. 212-602). Cyr. fab. A, red. Associated coins (Cat. 5:139 to 741) 308-277 B.C. Others: Tomb E. 19, 116, (723, 725 associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 BC. ]

640 Variant:

Cyrene,

73-111), info. John Riley.

Demeter

Sanctuary nv.

Shape VI vi, 781 Complete. Similar to v but low disk knob and angled wall, also to bowl shape (Cat. 212-1118). Cyr. fab. A, fawn, Associated coins (Cat. 5-800, 801) 415-375 B.C. Other: 643 Comment: probably lid to small collared bowl (Cat. 212-782).

Shape VI vii, 1067 Similar to iii but incised groove around low splayed knob with splayed rim band. The object shows a fire-crack, the sign of a kiln waster. Cyr. fab. A, hard buff viii, 337 Similar to vii but smaller. Cyr. fab. A, hard buff, some sand tempering. Similar to bowl shape (Cat. 212-340). Others: 62, [281 associated coins (Cat. 16-311a, b, c) late 4th-308, 246-222, 145-116 B.C.], 338, 642.

Shape VII ix. 1034 Complete. Knob replaced by a thin splayed band with concave wall and vertical rim band. Similar to bowl shape (Cat. 212-607). Cyr. fab. A, hard dull yellow. Variant: Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary (Inv, 73-292), info. John Riley.

Shape IX x. 882 Complete. Low splayed flat-topped knob, low concave wall with angled rim band. Cyr. fab. A,

inward-sloping top, chamfered side. Cyr. fab. A, pinkish buff xiv. 1096 Complete. Small rounded conical knob flaring into chamfered rim. Cyr. fab. A. 193. Tall Pyriform Oinochoe Fig. 414 i, 1218 Tripoli. Complete. Rod handle raised above level of outturned rim, neck and shoulder flared into bulbous body which tapers to make splayed disk foot similar to (Cat. 85-759). Cyr. fab. A, buff with fine sand tempering. Liquid cap. not available.

194. Shoulder Oinochoe Figs. 365, 371

i, 856 Complete. Outturned rim, concave neck, slightly raised handle, pronounced shoulder, tapering body, flared at base. Cyr. fab. A, hard yellow. Liquid cap. 210ml.

Comment: Decorated example (Cat. 125-127). Example: Euesperides P. 1774 info. Paul Robers i , 788 Sousa, Complete, as i. Cyr. fab. A, light red, Liquid cap. 150ml. Associated coins (Cat 5-800,801) 475-375 B.C.

195. Tall Oinochoe Fig. 373 1. 876 Complete. Flared rim, cylindrical body, flat base, undecorated. Decorated example (Cat. 137-283). Cyr. fab. D, hard red. Liquid cap. 180ml Variant: Similar to (Corinth VILIL, 50.51 Pls.

hard buff with sand tempering.

9,48 no. 198) with trefoil rim, ca. 550-146 B.C.

Shape X xi. 339 Complete. Knob indicated only by incised band on concave wall with angled rim band. Cyr. fab. A, hard red. Shape XI xii, 1066 Complete. Flat, string-cut flared knob combined with flat wall, vertical sided rim. Cyr. fab. A, hard red with sand tempering. Example: Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary, (Inv. 73-303 and Variant: 148.2), info. John Riley. Shape XII xiii, 647 Complete. Small conical knob, flat

196. Bell-mouthed Oinochoai Figs. 400, 426

i, 1322 Rim slightly outturned, bell-mouthed with strap handle below flared neck and shoulder, body straight-sided and carinated, meeting a splayed ring foot. Profile similar to (Cat. 205-611). Cyr. fab. A, hard pink. ii, 388 as i, pronounced outturned rim, body globular. Cyr. fab. A, light red and gritty. Liquid

cap. 260ml.

iii, 389 as ii, conical neck. Cyr. fab. B, buff with a small fossil ammonite. iv. 1101 Probably as i but smaller.

197. Disk-rimmed Oinochoai Figs. 365, 396, 407

i. 791 Complete, Pronounced rim, slightly raised tod handle, narrow flared neck, spherical body, raised splayed band for ring foot. Cyr. fab. A, pinkish buff. Liquid cap. ml. Associated coins (Cat.

[2 vi. 794 As i. Cyr. fab. A, soft light yellow with sand tempering. Liquid cap. 75 ml. Associated coins (Cat. 5-800,801) 475-375 B.C.

vii, 1311 Tripoli. Similar to i. Fabric hard yellow, some sand tempering,

5-800,801) 475-375 B.C.

ii, 1085 Probably as i but smaller. Cyr. fab. A, hard yellow. Other:

14.

iii, 1168 As i but smaller than ii. Cyr. fab. A, hard buff. 198. Spheriform Oinochoai 365-366, 378, 414, 424

Figs.

348, 359,

Shape I

199. Biconical Oinochoe Fig. 352

i. 666 Complete. Similar to (Cat. 198-705) but carinated, solid footring. Cyr. fab. A, pinkish.

200. Spheriform Olpe Figs. 347, 369, 372, 374-375

Shape I i, 610 Complete. Outturned rim, straight neck, slightly raised rod handle, spherical body resting on small splayed ring foot. Fabric hard yellow, small black inclusions. Liquid cap. 130ml. Other: 836 Tripoli Example: Cyrene Agora, The Oikos E. LE. 2

i. 705 Complete. Angled flanged rim, thick strap handles, tapering neck, incised groove at junction with globular body, plain-sided raised ring foot. Model example (Cat. 232-138). Cyr. fab. B, hard yellow. Liquid cap. 325ml. Associated coins (Cat, (Stucchi (1965), 43 Tav. XII,7). 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C. i , 890 Complete as i but ring foot more flared Others: (128), (150), 859 (Rowe II Pl. 250), 842. and spreading, knife-cut. Cyr. fab. A, hard yellow. ‘Comment: Model example (Cat. 231-138) Liquid cap. 70ml. Shape II

Shape II

i . 632 Complete, as i but ovoid body. Cyr. fab. B, iii. 865 Similar to i, differing only in rim and soft red, complete fossil ammonite in girth, Liquid width of neck. Cyr. fab. A, hard buff. cap. unobtainable, Other: 522 Shape ΠῚ Shape ΠῚ iii. 787 Complete, as i but neck offset at junction with squat body. Cyr. fab. A, yellow with yellow grog iv. 866 Complete. Rounded rim, straight neck, inclusions, also noticed in (Cat. 211-728). Liquid rod handle raised, globular body, raised ring foot. cap. 150ml. Associated coins (Cat. 5-800,801) 475Cyr. fab. A, hard buff. 375 BC. 892 Complete. Similar to iv, but handle lower iv. 1219 Complete, as iii without offset. Traces of andv. ring foot undefined. Cyr. fab. A, hard buff. Liqubrown pigment. Cyr. fab. 6, hard pinkish buff. Liquid id cap. 110ml. cap. 220ml, Others: Sousa 785, 786 liquid cap. 130, 135ml, asShape IV sociated coins as ii, 1220 liquid cap. 180 ml, 1088. vi. 840 Rounded rim, conical neck, globular Shape IV body, low raised base. Shape similar to (Cat. v. 925,

934

Outturned

rim, slightly raised

rod

handle, flared neck, globular body, raised ring foot lacking. Cyr. fab. A, soft buff.

124-823). Cyr. fab. A, hard yellow. Other: 867 Example: (Agora XII, 353 Pl. 77 no. 1664) ca 550 BC.

642

201. Pyriform Olpe Figs. 330, 359, 394 Shape I i. 711 Complete. Angled rim, flared neck, pyriform body. Cyr. fab. A, hard yellow. Liquid cap. 55ml.

Associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277

BC. ἢ, 714 Complete. Similar toi. Cyr. fab. A, fawn, rough exterior. Liquid cap. ml. Associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C.

Shape IT i i, 1071 Complete. Similar to i but conical neck, low splayed disk foot. Cyr. fab. A, hard red. Liquid cap. 40m Others: Tomb N. 197 loc. 3, (167), (169), 172; 1072 liquid cap. 40ml. Example: Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary, (Inv. 73-289), info. John Riley. Shape IIT iv. 334 Similar to ii but slimmer in body, knifecut. Cyr. fab. A, hard buff. Liquid cap. 55ml approx. Others: [889, 893 liquid cap. 40ml]. 202. Oviform Olpe Figs. 347, 359, 374, 393 Shape I

i, 609 Complete. Narrow flared neck, ovoid body

body, incised bands around neck and as a pair on body. Fabric hard, well-potted, salmon pink with white inclusions, slight sand tempering. Other: 631. v. 710 Complete. Similar to iv. Shape similar to (Cat. 138-628). Fabric red, some black inclusions. Associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C. Others: 706, [890A liquid cap. 51ml, 1038 liquid cap. 70ml), 1039.

203. Biconical Olpe Figs. 325, 330, 380 Shape I i, 332 Complete. Small flared neck, long loop on rod handle, long biconical body, small raised disk foot indicated by incised grooves at junction with wall and underneath. Cyr. fab. A, buff yellow. Liquid

cap. 55ml.

i , 335 Similar to i but raised fillet around neck and no raised foot, flat-bottomed. Cyr. fab. C, hard buff, no inclusions, fine sand tempering. Liquid cap. 55ml. Shape IT i i. 331 Complete. Similar to ii but incised bands around body at different levels. Cyr. fab. C, buff red sandy. Liquid cap. 40m. iv. 293 Similar to ii but shorter loop on rod handle. Cyr. fab. A, hard buff. Associated coins (Cat. 16-31 1a, b, c) late 4th-308, 246-222, 145-116 B.C.

slightly pyriform as (Cat. 201-1071), low disk foot. Cyr. fab. D, buff.

v. 957 Similar to ii but taller, with neck and handle as iv. Cyr. fab. A, hard red.

i . 1063 Complete. Similar to i but smaller. Cyr. fab. D, hard red, no inclusions, sand tempering. Liquid cap. 85m. Others: 109, 111, 137, 140, (792 liquid cap. 55ml, 793 associated coins (Cat. 5-800,801) 475-375 B.C. 893A liquid cap. 55ml.

Shape IIT vi 956 Complete. Similar to i but simpler, shorter Joop handle slightly raised and slimmer body. Cyr. fab. A, hard yellow. Liquid cap. 40ml. approx.

iii. 713 Complete. Similar to ii. Cyr. fab. C, red dish. Associated with coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C. Others: 136a-d, (707 liquid cap. 30ml, 712 associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C. 796

204. Carinated Olpe Fig. 372

Shape IL iv. 891 Complete. Similar to i with slim ovoid

Shape I i, 611 Complete. Outturned rim, conical neck,

i, 868 Neck and handle lacking, concave shoulder, conical body with flat base, knife-cut. Cyr. fab. A, hard buff.

associated coins (Cat. 5,800,801) 475-375 B.

643

rounded shoulder, straight-walled body, splayed footring. Profile similar to (Cat. 196-1322). Fabric very hard dull yellow, some black inclusions. Liquid

cap. 75ml.

v. 967 Similar to iii but deeper, with base lacking. Fabric very hard red, white inclusions.

Shape II

208. One-handled Cups Figs. 323, 330

di. 612 Complete. As i but flared rim and neck, angled shoulder, straight wall carinated. Cyr. fab. A, buff. Liquid cap. ml.

Shape I

206. Kantharos Goblet Figs. 350, 357

Shape ΠῚ

i, 239, 240 Rim slightly angled outwards with incised band, vertical rod handle, squat globular body with raised concave-sided ring foot. Similar to (Cat. 207-1055 and Cat. 209-292). Cyr. fab. A, fawn, fine sand tempering.

1. 692 Complete. Incised line just below rim, vertical ring handles, thin convex body, splayed resting Shape IT foot. Silhouette of stacking ring below handles. Cyr. i , 344 Similar to i. Incised line just below rim, fab. D, very hard, reduced appearance, blotches of horizontal handle, vertical sides, low body on a low, red oxidized surface, fine sand tempering. Liquid straight-sided ring foot. Cyr. fab. A, hard red, cap. 65ml. Associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308277 B.C. Other: 693 associated coins asi i , 660 as i, but body inward-sloping. Fabric as i. Liquid 65m).

cap.

50ml.

Others:

112,

[878

liquid

cap.

207. Two-handled Cups Figs. 330, 365, 375,

381, 393

Shape I i, 894 Slightly outturned rim, handles probably as iii, low globular body with small high raised base, string-cut. Cyr. fab. A, hard red, Liquid cap. 70ml. Other: N.

197 loc 3.

Example: Cyrene, Sladden Coll. (14.1). Variant: Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary 73-182), info. John Riley.

nv.

Shape IT

209. Handleless Cup Fig. 325

i, 292 Rim angled outwards with incised band, squat globular body concave underneath with raised ring foot. Similar to (Cat. 208-239). Cyr. fab. A, hard buff mottled red. Liquid cap. 25ml. Associated coins (Cat. 145-116 B.C.

16-311a-c)

late

4th-308,

246-222,

210. One Handled Collared Bowls Fig. 365

i. 779 Complete. Wide rim band offset, slightly angled horseshoe handle, body tapers to projecting ring foot. Cyr. fab. A, fawn. Liquid cap. 175ml. approx. Associated coins (Cat. 5-800, 801) 475-375 BC. Other: 1120 same cap. as 779. Example: Apollonia Museum Necropolis Tomb 10 (Goodchild (1977), 125 Tav. XXVa Inv. 65-212).

ii. 345 Similar to i but low raised base. Cyr. fab. A, hard buff.

211. Large Collared Bowls Figs. 343, 360, 404, 413

iii, 778 Complete. Similar to ii but spreading flared base, Fabric very hard dull yellow, some black inclusions. Identical in fabric to (Cat. 205-611). Liquid cap. 45ml. Associated coins (Cat. 5-800, 801) 475-375 B.C. Example: Cyrene, Sladden Coll. (14.1).

Shape I i. 728 Complete. Wide rim band offset, shallow body with low projecting base ring, underneath string-cut. Cyr. fab. A, buff. Associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C. Liquid cap. 250ml. Others: 727 associated coins as i, [784 associated with coins (Cat. 5-800, 801) 475-375 B.C.], 965. Example: Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary (Inv. 73321 and 156.1), info. John Riley.

iv. 1055 Complete. Similar to iti and (Cat 208-240). Fabric hard reduced, sand tempering.

644

i , 1210 Complete. As i, deeper body, string-cut. Cyr. fab. B, hard fawn with small fossil. Smaller example (Cat. 212-636). Cap. 250ml Others: 1141, 1298 cap. 175ml, 1299 cap. 210ml. Examples: Cyrene, Artemision (Pernier (1927), 150, Fig. 13; (1931), 208 Fig. 31) Votive Deposit, 4th or 3rd cent. B.C.

Examples: Cyrene, Sladden Coll. (14.1). ἵν. 639 Complete. Cyr. fab. B, hard, grey quartz and pieces of shell inclusions. Liquid cap. 60ml. v. 603 Complete. Cyr. fab. B, hard yellow. Liquid cap. 40ml, Others: 604 liquid cap. 45ml, 638.

Shape II

vi. 1118 Complete. Similar to lid shape (Cat. 192-781). Small round hole in floor of bowl. Cyr. fab. A, hard buff, sand tempering,

iii, 530 untraced. Rowe: ‘Dish.’ As i, without base ting. iv. 1211 Complete, as ii, without base ring. Cyr.

fab. A, hard fawn. Others: 409, 899. Example: Cyrene Northern Necropolis ‘Cyrene A,B’ Sarcophagi (Burton Brown (1948b), 149, Fig. 1 Inv. 41/47 and 52/47).

Shape ΠῚ v. 1142 Vertical rim band, convex wall, base ring string-cut, Hard pink fabric, black, grey, white inclusions. Cap. 260ml. 212. Small Collared Bowls Figs. 330, 346, 349, 360, 401, 406, 422-423, 425-426

The diversity in shape of the fifty-eight examples makes them possible to classify only on a rudimentary basis. The following selection is based on significant assemblages from particular rock cut tombs or sarcophagi. The two basic shapes defined are based on their larger counterparts (Cat. 211-728,1211). A description is given with the first examples only, the remainder with observations. Shape 1

vii, 607 Complete. Similar to lid shape (Cat. 192-1034). Cyr. fab. A, pinkish fawn. Others: 841, 1068, 1121. viii, 606 Complete. Similar to lid shape (Cat. 192-1033). Cyr. fab. A, fawn. Other: 1056,

ix, 1282 Complete, string-cut. bufi/yellow with black, grey and clusions. Similar to kalathos (Cat. cap. 90ml. Other: 783 associated coins

Cyr. fab. A, hard brown metallic in130-1091). Liquid (Cat. 5-800, 801)

475-375 B. C, 1127 liquid cap. 78ml.

x, 733 Fire-crack in base, kiln waster. Cyr. fab. A, pinkish. Associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C. Others: 732, [782 probably with lid (Cat. 192-781) associated coins (Cat. 5-800, 801) 475-375 BC]

xi. 602 Badly spalled side. Similar to lid shape (Cat. 192-722). Cyr. fab. A, fawn. Others: 1061, 1128 liquid cap. 50ml, 1169 liquid cap. 60ml, 1284 liquid cap. 50m].

xii, 640 Complete. Cyr. fab. C, red, riddled with 1.340 Complete. Wide rim band offset, low projecting base ring, underneath string-cut. Similar to hair-line cracks. Other: 1283 liquid cap. 50ml. lid shape (Cat. 192-337). Resinous substance near xiii, 636 Complete. Larger examples (Cat, interior of rim. Cyr. fab. A, buff. Liquid cap. 35ml. 211-1210). Cyr. fab. B, hard cream slightly oxidised, Other: 898. terracotta grog. Liquid cap. 60ml. Others: 641, 1035 liquid cap. 45ml, 1213 liquid ii, 341 Flared base removed and hole punctured in base of body. Cyr. fab. A, very hard buff, some cap. 50m Examples: Apollonia, Museum _ Necropolis sand tempering, Tombs e, 8 (Goodchild (1977), 123-124 Tav. i i, 605 Complete. Fabric hard yellow, some small XXIlle, f Inv. 66-462, 65-206) grey and white inclusions. Identical fabric to (Cat. xiv. 1319 Complete, knife-cut. Model example as 205-611). Liquid cap. 50m. Others: 637 liquid cap. not taken, 961. (Cat. 233-1216). Cyr. fab. A, hard yellow.

645

Others: 1008 liquid cap. 35ml, 1119 liquid cap. 40ml, 1171 liquid cap. 30ml, 1318 liquid cap. 60ml. xv. Others untraced: Rowe: ‘Bowl’ 9, 34, 60, 113,

(129), (133), (134), (159), (160), (161), (173), 364, 503, 511, (520), (521), 580, 581, 582, 583, 584.

Shape IT 1. 1156 Complete. Similar to ix but without a low foot band, string-cut. Model example (Cat. 233-1155). Cyr. fab. A, hard fawn, Liquid cap. 80m. Others: 413, 1150. Example: Euesperides, Johns Excavations 1952.53, info. Michael Vickers. i , 1324 Complete, string-cut. Cyr. fab. A, hard yellow. Liquid cap. 55ml. Others: 1100 liquid cap. 50ml, 1133 Example: Cyrene Northern Necropolis (1.4.2 Cyrene A Inv. 41/47). i i, 1271 Complete, string-cut. Cyr. fab. A, hard yellow. Liquid cap. 55ml. 213. Dishie Figs. 371, 414

i. 1212 Complete. Low convex body, broad turned base concave underneath. Similar to (Cat. 97-764). Cyr. fab. 6, hard red. Liquid cap. 50ml. Other: Tomb E. 19. 214. Salts Figs. 371-372

i, 864 Rounded rim, slightly inward-angled wall carinated at bottom, slightly concave underneath. Cyr. fab. A, hard yellow. ii, 857 Complete, as i, but splayed turned base. Cyr. fab. 6, hard buff, fine sand tempering. Liquid cap. 45ml, i i, 858 Complete, string-cut. As i but smaller. Cyr. fab. A, hard buff. Liquid cap. 41ml. Other: 1087 liquid cap. 30ml, knife-cut.

215. Unguentaria (Long Fusiform) Figs. 325, 330 Shape I i. 298 Long, flared tubular neck as i lacking.

Shoulder concave, body semi-ovoid with stemmed base, disk foot. Fabric hard bright red, no inclusions. Associated with coins (Cat. 16-311, b, c) late. 4th-308, 246-222, 145-116 B.C. Other: J Examples: Cyrene Northern Necropolis (14.2 Tomb N. 178 bis); Pompeii, Stabian Gate Tomb I (Corte (1911), 107-108 Fig. 3) terminus ante quem

24 August 79 AD.

Shape II (Riley Type A)

ii, 325a Flared tubular neck, body lacking. Fabric very hard deep red, some white inclusions. Associated coins (Cat. 16-3114, b, c) ate 4th-308, 246-222, 145-116 B.C ii, 325b Similar to i but ovoid body. Thin dull cream-coloured slip. Fabric hard red, some sand tempering. Associated coins (Cat. 16-3112, b, c) late 4th-308, 246-222, 145-116 B.C. Examples: Benghazi (Ghislanzoni (1915), 28, Fig. 14 no. 1); Sidi Khrebish (Lloyd (1979), 299-300 Fig. 113 no. 684); (Kerameikos 1X, 187-188 Taf. 97, 1 and 98, 1), Shape ΠῚ (Riley Type B)

iv. 328 Similar to iii but stemmed base has high conical base, string-cut. Cyr. fab. A, hard red, sand tempering. Others: 170,J, (296), (297), 1167. Example: Sidi Khrebish (Lloyd (1979), 301 Fig, 113 no. 685).

Shape IV v. 295 Similar to i but stemmed base longer with high disk foot. Fabric very hard deep red, some white inclusions. Associated coins (Cat. 16.311, b, c) late 4th-308, 246-222, 145-116 B.C. Other: 1020. Example: Cyrene, Sladden Coll. (14.1) Shape V

vi. 330 Tubular neck and stemmed base lacking, Body spherical. Fabric buff, sandy. Other: 1076.

216. Unguentaria (Short Fusiform) Figs. 325, 330, 348, 359, 364, 392, 401

Shape I

i, 1044 Complete. Tripoli. Angled rim band, short conical neck, swelling biconical body, disk base. Fabric buff, some black and red inclusions (V.19.2).

646

Example: Pontamo Necropolis Tomb 19 (Cl. Rh. II (1932), 157-158 Fig. 40); (Goldman (1940), 485, Fig. 199 no. 16).

Shape I i , 769 As i, more slender body. Fabric fawn. Associated with coins (Cat. 5-800, 801) 475-375 B.C. Other: 901 iii, 715 As ii but smaller. Fabric hard fine orange, small black inclusions, sand tempering. Liquid cap. 15ml. Associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C. Other: 187c.

Shape IIT iv. 635 As ii but body much more slender. Fabric dark red, no inclusions. Others: (174), 245, [300 associated coins (Cat. 16311a, b, c) late 4th-308, 246-222, 145-116 B.C.] 329, 499, 881, 900 cap. 15ml approx. Example: Cyrene, Sladden Coll. (1.4.1). Shape IV v. 301 Similar to iv without sim band, underneath turned. Cyr. fab. C, hard red, fine sand tempering Liquid cap. 15ml. approx. Associated coins (Cat 16-311a, b, c) late 4th-308, 246-222, 145-116 B.C.

Shape V. vi, 716 Similar to ii but flared base instead of a disk. Fabric fawn, no inclusions. Associated coins 5-739 to 741) 308-277 BC.

218. Unguentaria (Spheriform) Figs. 324, 393 i, 1050 Complete. Fabric and shape as (Cat 132-1017), hard buff with numerous black inclusions, some possibly shell, but smaller in body, Others: 524, 964, 978, 980-981, 1014-1016.

i . 266 Complete. Similar to i. Cyr. fab. B, dull fawn (V.12.5). Others: 265, 272, 832, 963, 991, 1012 liquid cap. 12m knife-cut, 1053 liquid cap. 10ml knife-cut, 1165.

219. Unguentaria (Carinated) Figs. 324-325, 369, 386, 407

Shape I i, 1013 Complete. Collared rim outturned, straight neck with raised band, flared shoulder with hemispherical body, splayed footring. Cyr. fab. A, buff. Liquid cap. 10ml.

i , 838 Complete. Similar to i string-cut. Cyr. fab. A, hard buff. Liquid cap. unavailable. Shape II iii, 269 Complete. Collared rim band, concave neck, pronounced conical base. Cyr. fab. B, dull

), D, 833, 990, 1010, 1019, 1052 liquid

cap. 8ml. Example: Cyrene, Sladden Coll. (L4.1). Shape ΠῚ

iv. 1164 Complete. Similar to i, collared rim, Shape VI flared hemispherical body below shoulder, vii, 1115 Similar to ii but smaller, with base as vi, splayed neck, footring. Cyr. fab. A, hard buff. Other: string-cut. Fabric hard red, no inclusions, sand tem- 1011. pering. Liquid cap. 25ml. Shape IV Shape VII v. 294 Complete. Flared rim, neck and shoulder, viii, 324 Similar to iv with base as vi. Fabric hard body hemispherical, splayed footsing. Cyr. fab. B, dull red, some white inclusions. soft dull red, Spalling on one side reveals grog. Other: 326, 397 liquid cap. 10ml.

217. Unguentarium (Oviform) Fi 39 i 1051 Complete. Disk rim, slightly concave neck, ovoid body, raised ring foot, string-cut. Cyr. fab. A, fine hard red. Liquid cap. not obtainable.

220. Unguentaria 373-374, 395

(Globular)

Figs.

332,

Shape I i. 877 Complete. Outturned rim, straight neck,

647

low globular body, no footring, rounded base. Cyr. fab. 6, hard buff. Liquid cap. 100ml. Shape IT

ii. 1077 Complete. Flat rim, conical neck, full slobular body, no footring, rounded base. Cyr. fab. A, hard red. Liquid cap. 120ml, iii 886 Similar to i but slightly carinated shoulder. Cyr. fab. A, hard fawn, Other: 992.

Shape III

i. 1054 Complete. Similar to i without foot. Fabric buff, black and white inclusions, sand tempering, Liquid cap. 15m, Variant: Cyrene Agora Portico 5 and Construction C (Stucchi (1965), 161 Tav. XXIXde-g; 176 Tav. XXX3b; (1967), 162 Fig. 180).

224. Lamp (Broneer Type VII) Fig. 314

i. 141 untraced. Cassels: ‘Browny-black’, identifies this as Broncer Type VII (Corinth IV-2. 140-142). Examples: (Delos XXV, 25 Pl. 4 no. 229); Rhodes (BMC Lamps I, 172-173 Pls. 78-79, Q381) probably first half 3rd cent. B.C.; Camiro Necropolis Grave 221. Lamps (Broneer Type IV) Figs. 347, 369 Rh. VI-VII. 176-178 Fig. 187) kantharos i. 831 Rounded rim, short nozzle showing signs of asLXX(Cat.(Cl.93-386). burning, low inverted sloping body, carinated base

iv. 355 Neck incomplete, low globular body. Cyr. fab. B, hard buff, sand tempering

concave underneath, knife-cut. Fabric soft buff, white, grey and black inclusions. Liquid cap. 20ml. approx. Example: (Cl. Rh. VI.VIL 512-516 Fig. 40 con: tains also a skyphos type (Cat. 89-1272) i , 614 Complete. As i with longer nozzle. Fabric buff, grey and black inclusions. Liquid cap. ml. 222. Lamp (Howland Type 30C) Fig. 385

i, 1006 Complete. Rounded nozzle, around wick hole faint traces of burning, double-convex body, low upright foot. Fabric hard red, white inclusions.

Liquid cap. 20ml

Example: (Agora IV. 98. 99 Pls. 15,41 no. 423),

possibly late 3rd to early 2nd cent. B.C. Dull red wash on upper part of body. Buff clay. 223, Lamps Figs. 375, 393-394 Shape I

i, 1069 Complete, Small circular filling hole, short nozzle rounded at end with burning around wick hole, bulbous squat body, low upright foot. Fabric hard buff, white, grey and black inclusions. Liquid

cap. 20ml.

Shape IT ii, 896 Complete. Similar to i but biconical body, no foot. Fabric soft red. Liquid cap. 15ml. Other: 495. Variant: Rhodes (BMC Lamps I. 180 Pls. 80-81 Qa.

225, Lamps (Broneer Type VIII) Figs. 331,

347, 349, 374-375, 384

1.348 Complete. Inward sloping rim, small filling hole defined by surrounding groove, rounded nozεἰς, carbon deposit around wick hole, doubleconvex body, rounded carination, solid spur on shoulder, flat knife-trimmed ring base. Fabric pink, mostly white inclusions, some black, sand temper. ing. Liquid cap. 40m.

Others; 346 liquid cap. 35ml, 347 liquid cap. 45ml, 350 liquid cap. 45ml, 351 liquid cap. 45ml,

352 liquid cap. ml, 353 liquid cap. ml, 393 liquid cap.ml Example: Cyrene Northern Necropolis (I. 4. 2 Tomb N. 178 bis); Isthmia Type XIA (Istbvia ΠῚ. 20 no. 205 Pl. 18) 3rd cent. B.C.

i , 349 Complete. As i but globular body. Fabric soft red, small black inclusions, lumps of lemon yel low grog. Liquid cap. 30m Others: [289a-c associated coins (Cat. 16-311a, b, c) late 4th-308, 246-222, 145-116 B.C.], 648, [7t associated coins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C.], 951, 982, 1086, 1111 liquid cap. 40ml.

iii, 613 Complete. As i but nozzle flat-topped and square-ended. Fabric hard yellow, small black inclusions. Liquid cap. 33ml.

Others: [701 liquid cap. 40ml, 702 associated co-

ins (Cat. 5-739 to 741) 308-277 B.C.; 771, 772 asso-

ciated coins (Cat.

5-800,801) 475-375 B.C.]

iv. 649 Complete. As i, nozzle as iii but fluked.

648

Fabric fawn, black and grey inclusions. Liquid cap ml.

v. 887 Complete. As ii, short flat-topped nozzle with rounded end. Fabric hard pinkish, numerous white, some black inclusions. Liquid cap. 25ml.

vi. 895 Complete. As v, but larger nozzle. Fabric

very hard fawn, black inclusions. Liquid cap. 35m. cap. 50m).

252, 828, 888, 1031, [1030, 1032 liquid

vii. 997 As i, tapering long nozzle. Fabric hard dull yellow, black inclusions. Other: 996.

viii. (165) untraced. Probably as i without solid lug on shoulder. Others: (TombE. 19), (164). Example: Marion (BMC Lamps I. 53 Pls. 16-17 Q77) first third of 4th cent. B.C. Variant: (Corinth IV-2. 141 Pl. ΠῚ πο. 126).

226. Lamp (Howland Type 32, Broneer Type XII) Fig. 321 i. 210 Complete. Rim concave, defined by deep

groove, small filling hole, long nozzle flat-topped with rounded tip, double convex body, ring foot concave underneath. Variant: (Agora IV, 100 Pls. 15,41, no. 426) late

second quarter 3rd cent. B.C. to end of century; (KerameikosXI, 52 Taf. 48-49 no. 283) 227. Lamp (Howland Type 40A) Fig. 309 i. Tomb 197 loc. 3 untraced. Fluked nozzle. Example: Cyrene Agora (Stucchi (1967), 162 Fig. 181; Sidi Khrebish (Bailey (1985), 19 Pl. V nos. 93,94).

228. Loom Weights (Pyramidal) Fig. 393 i, 1062 Complete. Concave sides knife-trimmed. Fabric reduced, white and some black inclusions. Others:

45,46

Examples: Cyrene Agora Portico B. 5 (Stucchi (1965), 161 Tav. XXIX, 4c); Sidi Khrebish (Lloyd (1979), 316 Fig.

117 no. 737).

Variant: Cyrene, Demeter 77-423), info. John Riley.

Shape I

i, 1126 Complete. Concave sides with flat middle Fabric hard buff, black inclusions. Shape II

Others: 115, 982, 1112.

Others:

229. Loom Weights (Discoid) Figs. 345, 402

Sanctuary (Inv.

i , 577 untraced. Rowe: ‘disk-shaped, two holes’. Examples: Cyrene Agora Portico B. 5 (Stucchi (1965), 161 Tav. XXIX, 4a, b); Sidi Khrebish (Lloyd (1979), 316-7 Fig. 117 no. 739). 230. Model Kalpis Fig. 418

i. 1245 Complete. Pronounced rim band with incised lines on top and side. Neck flared to shoulder, applied rod neck and shoulder handles, body rounded, discus ring foot concave underneath. Cyr. fab. 5, hard, smooth buff, similar to (Cat. 135-1217). Liquid cap. 80ml. 231. Model Shoulder Oinochoe Fig. 336

i, 416 untraced. Rowe: ‘Lekythos, broken.’ Larger example (Cat. 194-856). 232. Model Spheriform Oinochoe Fig.

314

i. (138) untraced. Rowe Arch. Ph. 300. Similar to larger example (Cat. 198-705).

233. Model Collared Bowls Figs. 406, 414 Shape i. 1216 Complete, string-cut. Similar to (Cat. 212-1319). Fabric hard buff, black inclusions. Liquid cap. 55ml. Other: 1170 liquid cap. 20ml, 1214, 1215 liquid cap. 35m]

Shape IT il. 1155 Complete, knife-cut. Similar to (Cat 212-1156). Fabric hard buff, black and brown inclusions. Liquid cap. 39ml. 234. Model Vessels Figs. 324, 383, 395 Shape I i, 271 Neck lacking, globular body, low raised band with incised groove above. Fabric dull fawn,

red and black inclusions, some shell. Fine sand tem pering (V.12.5). Other. D. Examples: Cyrene, Sladden Coll. (14.1); Demeter

649 dish pottery. L. 38.0 W. 19.0 Th. 2.0. (L. 0.380 W. 0.190 Th. 0.020m.).

Sanctuary (Inv. 74-127) info. John Riley.

236. Earthenware Tiles Fig. 410

Shape IL ii 268 Complete. Rounded rim, flared neck, straight-sided body with base defined by incised groove. Fabric asi, Liquid cap. 5ml. approx. Others: D, 1073 liquid cap. 6ml, 1074 liquid cap. 8ml. Examples: Cyrene, Sladden Coll. (14.1); Demeter Sancıu ary (Inv. -), info. John Riley. Shape ΠῚ i i, 1075 Similar to i with collared rim band.

Building materials, but lack of suitable structures in the Necropolis suggests their use was connected with cist-like burials of the Roman era

iv. 267 Complete. Flat angled rim, flared neck, ridged body, flared base. Fabric asi Others: 501, 988 liquid cap. 6ml, 1018, 1075.

Shape IV

v. 989 Broken in antiquity, handle lacking, flared neck, globular body, incised line at junction with pronounced disk foot. Fabric buff, white and black inclusions. Liquid cap. 10ml approx. Other: 519. Example: Cyrene, Sladden Coll. (14.1). 235. Terracotta Grave Covers Figs. 306-307 i 11 untraced (III. 1. 2). ‘L. 0.840 0.265 Th. 0.025m' Buttle Arch. (V.19.1).

W.

0.340,

Other: 1025 in soft red fabric, black and white inclusions. Example: Ant. Dept. Cyr. Inv. 3072, L. 0.855, W.

0.380, 0.280m, curve H. 0.120, 0.100 Th. 0.025m; Corinth Tile Grave 6 (Wiseman (1967), 34-35 Pl.

14d). Four tiles used over burial in overlapping pairs, with rectangular pieces at head and foot ends. i . 37 untraced. Rowe: ‘Roofing tile. Curved. Red.

i, 1183 Fragment, hypocaust pila, hard buff fab. ric, grey and black inclusions, incised epigraphical mark (V.19.2) Variant: Cyrene, Apollo Sanctuary ‘Thermal Baths (Oliverio (1930), 149-150, Figs. 9,11). i , 1956 season. Untraced small fragment, rectangular stamp with two line inscription, probably in centre of rectangular tile (Rowe Arch. Ph. 46). Examples: Cyrene, Apollo Sanctuary Thermal Baths (Oliveri (1930), 151 Fig. 12); Colonnaded Building, Norton 1911 Excavation (Norton (1911), 152 Pl. LIV),

ADDENDUM IV (Add)

Lamp (Howland Type 21ς, Broneer Type IV) Fig. 417 i. 1236 Tripoli. Fabric hard, smooth buff, unglazed. Comment: Most probably Cyr. fab. 5 Example: (Tocra II, 96-97 Fig. 44 Pl. 44 no. 2416) 215. Unguentarium Shape ΠῚ (Riley Type B) Example: Tocra Eastern Rampart Cist Grave 1 (Wright (1963), 59 Fig. 15) dated to mid 3rd cent. BC.

SECTION V

Marble sculpture consists mainly of a herm shaft and aniconic female bust with polos (Cats. 238, 243) and a small collection of Roman funeral busts, made from re-used materials (Cat. 244). Limestone sculpture of a small iconic half-figure with polos is typical of a group found at Cyrene but differs because of the OEA inscription (Cat. 262). The unique aniconic half-figure with polos has a flat back suggesting its possible positioning in a naiskos, and smaller examples are present, one with a mantle (Cat. 257-260). Monuments consist of Doric

columns belonging to a naiskos, kioniskoi (Cats. 247, 249), a slab stele showing in relicf a Ptolemaic figure (Cat. 252-1331) and model slab stelai (Cat. 255). A slab with stoppers is an unusual item (Cat. 256)

NOTES

652 LIST OF CATEGORIES

Marble Sculpture 237. Marker Column 238. Herm 239. Stelai Mouldings 240. Inscribed Slab Stele 241. Miscellaneous Inscriptions 242. Miscellaneous Materials 243 Aniconic Busts 244. Funeral Busts 245. Statuary Limestone Sculpture 246. 247. 248. 249. 250. 251.

Entablature Mouldings Doric Columns Inscribed Pedestal Kioniskoi Phallic Grave Marker Pedestal Stand

252, 253 254. 255. 256. 257. 258. 259. 260. 261, 262. 263 264,

Relief Slab Stelai Slab Stelai Stepped Stelai Bases Model Slab Stelai Slabs and Stoppers Aniconic Half Figures with Polos Aniconic Busts with Polos (Type A) Model Aniconic Grave Marker ‘Aniconic Half Figure with Mantle (Type O) ‘Aniconic Half Figure with Mantle (Type P) Small Iconic Half Figures with Polos Sphinx Statuary

Organics 265. 266. 267.

Seeds Mollusca

Coral

653 SECTION V

240. Inscribed Slab Stele Fig. 369

MARBLE SCULPTURE (Mb) Nos. 237-245

i, 839 fragment. Hollow groove borders tympa‘um with double cut groove on bevelled cyma. Inscription incomplete. White marble. Th. 0.036 m

237. Marker Column Fig. 315

(V.15.4).

152 untraced. Rowe: ‘Fluted column. H. 8.6+ Dia. base 8.6 cms’ Rowe Arch.

Ph.

302-303

(Rowe II, 22

Greck — cent

Letters H. 0.040 m+

nl) Comment: Presence of the cincture on the frag-

241. Miscellaneous Inscriptions 321, 392, 400, 423, 426

and could be of the lonic order. The mean height of

a. Slabs

ment means that the capital and base were separate, 0.602m is based on the proportions of Doric order (Cat. 247-207,b).

Date uncertain. Rowe: ‘Pedestal part of

large herm, once probably supporting bead of Hermes; knobbled staff in relief on one side; its top seems to have been bronze. White marble.’ H. 1.680 W. 0.490 Ὁ. 0.460 m (V.18.2).

1.205 fragment of staff with lightly knobbled surface belonging to i . Coarse-grained marble. Comment: Probably published upside-down, terminal bust on badly damaged end, Square socket 0.047 m deep underneath for empolion with four small circular drilled holes near each edge of block

similar to (Cat. 251-1026).

i. 1102 Inscription incomplete. Granular white marble.Th. 0.080 m. (V.17.1).

238. Herm Fig. 320 ii. 202 left on site 1955.

Figs. 319,

Customary engaging

squared base, possibly inscribed, was not discovcred. Examples: Cassels described a similar example "Marble stele also there w. stick carved on one side in front of Tomb S. 14, reused (Cassels Arch. Yellow Book fol. 2; (1955), 21,35 PL. D). A vertical, slightly tapering example with no terminals appears on ἃ marble block stele from New Shabat, staffL. 1.20 m. 239. Stelai Mouldings Figs. 323, 423

i, 257 Cornice with cavetto moulding and ovolo.

Coarse-grained white marble.

Example: Ant. Dept. Cyr. (IC, 20 Fig. 14 no. 7)

ii. 1302 Cornice capping to shaft. Moulding on three sides, fillet, cavetto, cyma reversa of lesbian kymation and bead and reel. Back straight-sided with bevelled lower edge. Marble as i (V.14.1).

Letters H. 0.100-0.060 m.

Comment: Possibly part of funerary verse. ii, 1288 as i. Th. 0.013 m.

Roman

cent.

Letters H. -

i i, 1330 Inscription incomplete. Irregular capitals, White marble. Th. 0.028 m. Roman

cent

Letters H. 0.040 m.

DIOL M] ONIM [ENTiv. 1049 as ii, Th. 0.054 m. Roman

cent.

Letters H. 0.023 m. Mt ΤΟΥΓ ΤΙΝΙ

b. Block

v. 190 Geometric mark incomplete, White marble. vi. 212 Geometric mark incomplete, White marble. 242. Miscellaneous Materials Figs. 320-321, 323

i, 260 Veneer, white marble, one edge slightly rounded in profile. Th. 0.016 m.

654 ii, (204) Veneer, white marble.

i i, 1105 Left hand clutching drapery.

iii, 208 Veneer, grey-veined white marble. Th.

iv, 821 untraced. Rowe: ‘Statue arm. Others: 811, 812

0.010 m.

iv. 195 Black granite. Two cut surfaces survive. White crystalline felspar mixed with black particles and black micaceous splinters.

243. Aniconic Bust Fig. 317 i. 185 Head slightly larger than life, low polos, wavy wig. Fine-grained white marble, top and back of figure roughly dressed. Unregistered left shoulder fragment with fold of tunic, Total H. 0.450 m, polos H. 0.065 Dia. 0.210 m, wig H. 0.270 W. 0.240 m, aniconic face H. 0300 W. 0.140 m. (V.18.1; Beschi (1972), 294 Fig. 103 Cat.

129).

v. 941 Drapery fragment. vi. 374 untraced. Rowe: ‘Frag. of marble. Amber coloured. LIMESTONE SCULPTURE (Ls) Nos. 246-264 246. Entablature Mouldings (Cassels Tomb E. 160) Fig. 320

1.193 Egg and dart.

244. Funeral Busts Figs. 370, 372, 402

i , Rowe: ‘leaf and dart i, 848 Female, coarse-grained white Thracian marble, much abraded surfaces, nose and lower i i, 194 Bead and reel astragal. neck missing. Long, wavy hair drawn back in thin Comment: Parts of entablature to tomb (Rowe II, strands behind ears and short central parting, bor- 5, Fig. 1 inset). The cornice was most likely of two dering forehead with ten hooked ringlets. Across courses, with the upper showing a cyma recta of forehead are three lines forming headband and an- tongues and a drip cornice which is missing. The other double line dipping towards bridge of nose in lower contained i followed by i , the latter more an arc, H. 0.178 W. 0.112 Th. 0.112m. of cyma reversa with lesbian kymation. Below Example: Ant. Dept. Cyr. (Rosenbaum (1960) likely on the was iii, probably on a fascia by 108-109 Pl. LXXXVI, 3-4 Cat. 218). Hairstyle Julio- the upperthirdjoint,courseA more elaborate example of this Claudian, A.D.

41-54.

ii, 1129 Male, coarse-grained white Parian mar-

form of cornice is that on Cassels Tomb N.1 (Cas sels (1955), 11 Pls. IVa, b, VIIID)

ble. Right side of forchead, right eye and most of abraded nose broken away, lower neck missing. 247. Doric Columns Figs. 321, 369 Short, curly hair trimmed above ears and closely cut i. 207a untraced. Rowe: ‘plain rounded back’ beard.H. 0.128 W. 0.104 m. H. 0.042 0.950 H. Total II). Fig. II (Rowe Example: Ant. Dept. Cyr. (Rosenbaum (1960), m Shaft H. 0.870 m Plinth H. 0.038m Capital m. 110 Pl. LXXXVIII, Cat. 225). Hairstyle Hadrianic Reassessed on evidence of fragments and pubA.D. 120-140. lished dimensions. Abacus 0.142 m square flat topped, empolion socket does not survive. Echinus of iii, 868A Female, Parian marble, fragment of cyma reversa with two fillets. Shaft composed of rounded bottom of bust. The tunic shows schematic nine flutes for three-quarters of circumference with folds of drapery. plain back. Small fillet above torus which rests on circular plinth. Underneath, a 0,030 m square sock245. Statuary Figs. 333, 367, 370, 378, 400, 403 i, 1130 Index finger of right hand with iron dowel. ii, 849 Left hand from half figure (Cat. 260-912) etal.

et 0.016 m deep, probably for empolion, may indi-

cate an engaged pedestal or sll. Comment: These columns are suitable for a naiskos, a slab-built example of which was found by Tomb S. 80 bis (Beschi (1972), 165-167 Figs.

655

22-23). Another naiskos slab recently discovered in New Shahat, at present housed at Casa Parisi ii. 207b as i, Rowe: ‘One ofthe columns has part of

the abacus attached.’ (Rowe II, 5 n. 4, 22 Fig, ID.

iii, 830 Shaft fragment of marker column, four-

teen shallow flutes and three drilled holes Dia.

0.010 D. 0.025 m. Comment: No bronze discolouration noticed on the stone. Similar example in marble (Cat. 237-152). 248. Inscribed Pedestal Fig. 321

cent. B.C. with inscribed variant in Tomba del Rilievi (Dennis (1848), 255); Caere Necropolis (Mengarelli (1915) XII, 355-365 Figs. 7-17), numerous examples. 251, Pedestal Stand Fig. 387

i. 1026 Top with cylindrical tenon, rectangular socket in middle for empolion to engage with possible basin, Neck moulding small fillet, chamfer, to rus, quirked chamfer with bead, below which it flares outwards into apophygis, quirked torus, bead, inverted caveto. Base concave with rectangular socket as before for empolion, with three drilled equidistant holes.

i. (207e) Comice moulding incomplete with surviving fillet and inverted cyma reversa, and base mouldings of quirked cyma reversa and fillet. Dado and inscription incomplete, shows first and lower 252. Relief Slab Stelai Figs. 348, 426 three lines of inscription. Back roughly dressed. i, 1331 Fragment, male figure, body slightly twisTh. 0.017 m. ted toL, wears nemes with lapels resting on front of shoulders, false beard and schenti, uraeus uncertain. Greek cent. B.C. Letters H. 0.028-0.024 m. Comment: Example from Alexandria, Sciatbi Necropolis (V.4.0; Breccia (1912), 4 Tav. XX, 23 no. 4) shows slab stele in form of (Cat. 255-1296) with re 249. Kioniskoi Figs. 367, 392 lief figure cut within rectangular recess. Alternai, 1046 Abacus of fillet, bead and fillet, straight- tively, a stele at Motya shows recessed figure similar sided necking fillet with triple sinkage, below which to Cyrene fragment within Ptolemaic facade with it flares out towards base moulding of inverted cyma reversa. Plinth has been chipped away to cobra entablature (Moscati (1987), 117 Fig, 129). make base convex. Hole Dia.0.013 m drilled verti 1325 Lower corner fragment, lightly cut in recally through pedestal, filled with terra rossa, no lief,i , shows leg in profile as if figure walking to left, bronze or iron discolouration (V.16.2). fold of drapery behind knee. Other: 1065. Variant: Cyrene, Demeter Sanctuary (inv, 78599), information Professor Donald White; Corinth 253. Slab Stelai Figs. 387, 391, 402 (Weinberg (1949), 149, Pl. 15 no. 5). i 1027 Blocking course. Well dressed exposed surface. Underside shows keying by chisel. i , 818 untraced. Rowe: ‘Altar or incense stand(2) Comment: Proportion and size suggest position H. 33.0 D. 20.0 (0.330, 0.200 m) above stele cornice moulding, a feature shown on Other: 384 (Rowe II, 22 n.1), 1007 Cassels’ stelai group N. 380-383 and on sculptured facade of Cassels Tomb N. 17.

250. Phallic Grave Marker Fig. 367

i 819 untraced. Rowe: ‘Stopper for libution D. 22.5." Comment: Turned domed top, flared sides, base lacking. Similar representation as central acroterion on sarcophagus (Rowe II Pl. 1c). At Cerveteri, Banditaceia Necropolis in Via Sepolcrale Principale phallic markers with disk-shaped bases identical to bole(?) Limestone H. 24.0

Rowe's stopper (Moretti (1977), 4, Fig. 3) 4th-3rd

ii 1041 Comice on three sides of fillet and quirked ovolo with plain dressed surfaces, back and top roughly worked. H. 0.810 W. 0.325, 0.290 Th. 0.145, 0.135 m. (V.15.3). Other: 1042+ H. 0.740 W. 0.310 Th. 0.110, 0.095 m.

Comment: Cut socket on sarcophagus plinth N.S1-AL could just be suitable for this size stele.

656

iii. 1125 similar to ii, Cornice moulding differs by being chamfered.

H.

Surv.

0.216 W.

0.275, 0.230

Th. 0.100, 0.077 m. (V.14.2). Example: Ant. Dept. Cyr. Inv. 648 smaller. Surv. H. 0.320 W. 0.150, 0.130 iv.

1122

untraced.

Th. 0.060

Finds label ca.1957:

‘left on

site’, Rowe: ‘Stela with comice at top on three sides. Limestone. H. 85.0 W. 35.0.’ (Cat. 254-1123).

ces with circular holes cut through, stopper slightly smaller size. L. 0.520 W. 0.360 Th. 0.150 m. Other: Tomb E. 161 tumulus. Slab untraced, circular hole off-centre, Rowe: H. 039 L. 1.25+ W. 0.71 m. Hole Dia.0.19 m (Figs. 269, 272). Examples: New Shahat, rescue items L. 0.460 W.

0.290 Th. 0.210, double hole Dia.0.130 m; another as a pair L. 0.470 W. 0.300 Th. 0.200, double hole

Dia.0.130 m; truncated conical stopper H. 0.180 m.

Comment: Cornice description and size seem to iii, 263 Cone-shaped stopper, flat top, sides follow ii roughly undresed apex. H. 0077 Example: (Brueckner (1909), 6-13. Abb. 3-7), on Dia.0.010 faceted, m. triple stepped bases. iv. 264 as iii, including dimensions.

254. Stepped Stelai Bases Fig. 402 i, 1123 H. 0.400, 0.820 m sq. (Cat. 253-1122 ‘Be-

longs to M. 1123}.

390

ii. 1124 H. 0.350, 0.880 m sq.

Comment: i and ii left in 1957 on flattened spoil heap over Enclosure N. 82-23 (Rowe II, 9, 24 Fig. XIV PLC) 255. Model Slab Stelai Figs. 387, 423

i, 1296 Slightly tapered, tympanum with three acroteria, simple cornice with incised groove Roughly-dressed back, chamfered upper comers (V.15.5).

Comment: Full size examples Alexandria, Sciatbi Necropolis (Breccia (1912), 10-11 Tav. XXIIno. 27; 147 Tav. XLI,99 no. 280) painted scene or cut in cription. ii.

1028 Back

257. Aniconic Half Figures with Polos Fig.

similar to i above

with

acroteria

roughly removed by sharp instrument. Simple cornice moulding cut on front only due to its original shape. Should resemble (Cat. 253-1041). 256, Slabs and Stoppers Fig. 324 i, Unregistered. Rowe's Slab X. Left on site 1955 (Rowe IL, 6 Fig. VID. Measured in Sept 1991: L. 0.570 W. 0.430 Th. 0.0250, hole Dia. 0.160.0.140 m,

i. 1040 head, 1045 body; Low flared polos sitting on short stylized hair with middle parting, on either side two pronounced waves with curled-up ends concealing ears. Detail of hair does not continue behind ears or around flat back of figure. Aniconic face confined by hair which does not reach shoulders, but reveals cylindrical neck. Figure wears girdled chiton with overfold, and plaid over shoulders and arms. Both arms raised, left hand against chest holds between thumb and index finger an alabastron, the disk and neck of which have been hacked away by a sharp instrument in antiquity. Right hand missing from above wrist, but probably held plaid open. Back of figure flush with rear of polos, roughly chiselled undulating surface. H. 0.900 W. 0.560 Th. 0.280 m. Polos H. 0.045 Dia. 0.195 m. Aniconic face from shoulder to top of forehead H. 0.215, between hair W, 0.120 m. Alabastron H. 0.230 Disk Dia.0.060m. (V.18.1). Comment: Socket cut on central plinth of sarcophagus N. 81-Q to receive this figure (Beschi (1972), 142 Fig. 2; 222 Fig. 64 no. 15). 258. Aniconic Busts with Polos (Beschi Type

A) Figs. 338, 342, 344, 407, 421

i, 1160 Low flared polos on highly stylized hair

ii, 451 Low flared polos with three fat chiselled facets at back. Hair shown as four rows of stylized i , 262 Rowe's Slab Y with stoppers iii and iv curls across forchead and three vertical rows down (Rowe II, 6, 14 Fig. VII PI. 4a). Well dressed surfa- sides of face to shoulders concealing ears. Mantle

657

below polos may be represented by flat facetted area behind curls. (V.18.1; Beschi (1972), 143-144 Fig. 6; 213 Fig. 61 no. 5) second half 5th cent. B.C. iii, 1265 Curled wig flowing on to left shoulder, neck of chiton visible. Reconstruction is partly based on i

from the temples in tight ringlets under a veil which covers the head. Joining pieces of left arm exposed issuing from the himation (Beschi (1972), 296-7 Fig. 105 no. 136). Reconstruction based on example from Wadi 78).

Sneidi (ibid. 201, 268 Figs.

56, 89 no.

iv. 543 untraced. Rowe: ‘Frag. of Persephone figurine. H. 8.4. (0.084 m); (Beschi (1972), 143-144 Fig.

261. Aniconic Half Figure with Mantle

v. 526 untraced. Rowe: ‘Fragment of Persephone figurine. Limestone. H. 5.4. (0.054 m) (Beschi (1972), 143-144 Fig. 6). Comment: Curled wig of first three examples can be compared against hair shown in rudimentary fashion on 543 and 526, which lack detail.

tight curls piled high above forehead covered by a mantle with shallow folds as noticed on (Cat 260-912, etal). Hairstyle Flavian, ca, 80-100 A.D. Example: Ant. Dept. Cyr. (Beschi (1972),

6).

(Beschi Type P) Fig. 401.

i. 1109 Female, upper part of head, four rows of

283-285 Fig. 97 no. 112).

262. Small Iconic Half Figures with Polos 259. Model Aniconic Grave Marker Fig. 337 Figs. 406, 411, 426 i, 426 Splayed polos rests on wig indicated by i, 1153 Low flared polos, hair wavy at front and horizontal lines. Neckline of garment represented top but straight at sides, drawn back behind ears to by two incised lines forming semi-circle at front, reveal ear pendants. Hair not indicated at back. square at back. Lightly incised outline of shoulder, Body lacking, probably as i . Total H. 0.086 W. arm hanging down but bent upwards (Beschi 0.065 Th. 0.071 m. Polos H. 0.018 Dia.0.058 m. (1972), 143 Fig. 4).

(Beschi (1972), 143 n. 5 Fig. 5).

260. Aniconic Half Figure with Mantle

i , 1185, 1333 Low flared polos with lightly incised graffiti on front:

(Beschi Type O) Figs. 376, 388

i, 1332, 1029, 1029 bis Head separated from body in antiquity. Hair parted in middle, painted in red with face and mantle in yellow ochre. No evidence for facial features being painted on to the aniconic surface. Rasp noticed by Beschi on drapery of mantle (Beschi (1972), 298 Fig. 105 no. 138). Body incomplete, surfaces badly abraded and weathered, Shows right arm and hand bent across body, left hand raised, clutching end of mantle. No paint found in interstices of folds of himation. Head Rowe: ‘H. 0.184 W. 0.185" Body H. 0.365 W. 0.188 Tb. 0.140 m. Estimated overall H. 0.600 W. 0.320 m (V.18.0. Comment: Considered by Beschi to be part of the same figure (Beschi (1972), 142-143 Fig. 3). Recon. struction based on (ibid. 268-269 Fig. 89 no. 78). Norton 1911 Excavation notes ‘in several cases the faces were not carved but painted (Dawkins (1911), 301), and publishes only two near-complete exam ples (Norton (1911), 161 Pl. LXXIVe, d; ibid. 235 Fig. 69 no. 27; 296 Fig. 104 no, 133). i , 912.915 Hair would seem to be drawn back

BEA

Formalised wavy hair covers cars and falls on to shoulders. Figure wears himation concealing hands and arms, which are slightly raised under folds and brought together across chest, Seams are portrayed down outside of sleeves. Back is flat and roughly cut, Total H. 0.220 W. 0.150 Th. 0.036 m. Polos H.

0.018 Dia. 0.060 m. Letter H. 0.006. Inscription L. 0.024 m (V.18.2; Beschi (1972), 220 Fig. 63 no. 13)

second half 5th cent. B.C.

i i, 383 as fi, head missing. Garment portrayed as vertical stylised drapery folds with criss-cross lines. ‘on top of slightly rounded shoulders. Sleeves shown. asi with hands concealed, 263. Sphinx Fig. 407

1162 Slab fragment. Hind quarters of seated sphinx facing right as a bas-relief Comment: Sphinx usually represented in the

658 round as on Ionic column in Cyrene (Goodchild (1968), 190-196 Figs. 3-4 Pls. LXVIII-LXXI) or on funeral stelai (Richter (1961), 27-29 Figs. 96-109 no. 37), unprovenanced example in Cairo Museum (Edgar (1903), 29 Pl. XVI no. 27508). Bas-relief

block from Motya more applicable to Rowe's frag.

ment as it is not in the round 278-279 Figs. 56-57).

(Whitaker

(1921),

centrations were present in N. 83-BJ where a limeencrusted wine amphora (Cat. 177-745), showing on

the outside a pattern of fine roots (Rowe II, 7b), contained six hundred and forty-five shells, also covered in thick concretion. An olpe from this sarcophagus (Cat. 126-790), covered in lime concretion inside and out, contained terra rossa and shells ii or iv and ix, proving that lid and case were not sealed as Rowe claimed {Π1.10.1; Rowe II, 12 N. 83-BK).

264. Statuary Figs. 377, 385, 410, 423 Ὁ 1003, 1004 Hand and parts of drapery ii, 1304, 1305 Parts of arm with drapery

i , A Left forearm from half-figure iv. 919 Wavy hair

v. 922 Deep drapery folds vi. 1186 Amorphous drapery fold, undrawn vii. 1303 Naturally formed piece of stone, un drawn ORGANIC (Og) Nos. 265-267

265. Seeds Fig. 327

Four fruit seeds and eight small stones were unknowingly gathered up with faience ‘berries’ (Rowe 1I, 23) belonging to a wreath (Cat. 12-304). These may have entered the tomb by the action of hillwach, without which protection lime concretion would have formed, rendering them unrecognisable 1.304} (Identification needed.)

Another concentration was in sarcophagus N. 81-RR (Rowe II, 8, Pl. 2ic) covering the cremation

burial where a narrow-necked jug (Cat. 124-1173) contained shells ii, ili, vi, Parmacella festae, Ceci lioides cf acicula and C. jani adhering to the inner wall of the vessel. A mollusca sample taken on 24th September 1991 in Enclosure N. 83-BK containing this sarcophagus found most of the species, i, ii, vi, vii and ix present today. An opportunity to take ἃ sample from within the sarcophagus itself arose on 4th April 1995, and it was found that i , i i and vi ere present, The concentration was under a hundred in the space of nearly forty years, and was found to be moist, whereas the exposed rock-cut graves and Lower Enclosure N. 81-B were at that time of year seen to be full of rainwater. These mollusca have now been reported on by Dr. Seddon and the following list of species identified (Seddon (1994), 149-156 Figs. 1-3).

Catalogue i, Ovi

10 (1.55%)

ii, Family Zonitidae

Eopolita forcati. Eastern Mediterranean and Middle East, this being the western-most member of the genus

372 (57.67%)

iii. Family Pleurodiscidae

Pleurodiscus cf klemmi, Eastern i , 304f (Identification needed.) ‘Mediterranean, found in region of Comment: This might represent the kolliva, Shahat and Apollonia, probably ‘seeds of life." living amongst rocks Examples: Northern Necropolis, Cyrene A and B Sarcophagi (Burton Brown (1948), 148-149), iv. Helix melanostoma and love called ‘grain’ dart v. Family Ferussaciidae 266. Mollusca Fig. 362 Cecilioides spp Widespread Concentrations of gastropoda in sarcophagi are Mediterranean species, essentially not uncommon, generally covering burials in a shell subterranean, frequently recorded layer (Ant. Dept. Cyr. Ph. 2493, 1270). Such con- from burial situations.

128 (19.85%) 10 (1.55%)

3 (0.46%)

vi. Rumina decollata, Eastern Mediterranean vii, Family Oleacinidae Poiretia compressa, Cyrenaica local, habitat humid, shady places, often beneath boulders and in crevices in limestone or sandstone regions. Also found throughout Western Greece (Seddon (1994), 153 Fig. 2).

2. Palacoecological information

67 (10.40%)

vii. Family Clausilüdae Barcania cf kaltenbachi Cyrenaica local ix. Family Enidae Paramastus

42 (652%)

edentatus

Cyrene

local x x xii, Family Parmacellidae Parmacella festae South-eastern

659 to the poor level of data relating to the Mollusca of the region.

6 (0.095%) 1(0.015%) 12 (1.8696) 2 (0.0596)

Pleurodiseus cf. klemmi, Parmacella festae and Eupolita forcart are all local endemics which are likely to be found under large rocks against a muddy surface. During dry periods these species are likely to burrow deep to prevent dessication. It is possible for the species to be carnivorous, but is more likely that these were feeding on vegetable detritus. Species of the genus Cecilioides spend the majority of their life underground, These species are known to live at depth in the soil, and there are frequent records from grave-yards and burial situations. These habits mean that species from this genus are commonly discounted for palacoenvironmental reconstructions.

Rumina decollata (L. ) is a widespread circumMediterranean species, which often lives in disturbed habitats. It is frequently living at archaeological sites, and is widespread in similar habitats, living under stones, feeding on vegetable detritus. The 12 (1.86%) species has the capability of self-fertlizing Mediterranean, habitat bare earth under large stones Paramastus cf. edentatus is an endemic species which again lives in rocky places, under stones. 267. Coral Fig. 380 Sometimes associated with rock crags. i. 953f Sprig (Corallium rubrus) Barcania cf. kaltenbachi is a member of the family Comment: Della Cella found recent coral on the Clausiliidae. There is little data on the ecological resea shore at Apollonia in 1817 (Della Cella (1822), quirements of this species, but I suspect that like 161-162). many of the taxa in this family the species vill live Example: Tocra I, 167 no. 111 Archaic deposit. either on rock crags, or on the underside of large stones, ADDENDUM V

(Add)

266. Mollusca

Ds. Mary Seddon, Department of Zoology, National Museum of Wales 1. General Comments

Poiretia compressa has a native range in Greece,

and is a probable introduction into Libya in Hellen: ic times (Seddon (1994). Again a species commonly found under stones on vegetated slopes. Helix cf. melanostoma, a species generally wide — spread in moister parts of the eastern Mediterranean.

These species are all still present in the region of 3. Origin of the Mollusca in the Amphora Cyrenaica in Libya. Four of these species are endemic to the region, the remaining species are more Given the range of species in the amphora it is widespread in the circum-Mediterranean region. unlikely chat these were placed in the amphora for Some of these identifications remain provisional due funerary reasons. If there was any wine in the am-

660

phora, it would have attracted many of these species to feed. 4. Evidence of Predation

Some of the holes may suggest predation, but these may be related to other snails rasping on the shells of neighbours to obtain calcium for shell building. Some ‘Helicids’ are prone to predation by

insect groups, who bore holes in the shell, Many of the holes in the shells are not evidence of certain lay their and subsequently when the larvae predation, merely fragile shells broken in situ or hatch, theyeggs, kill (and eat) the animal. subsequently.

Fic. 306 — Assem. I, Sondage 1 Asse. II, Sondage 2

Rowe I, 4n. 1; 11,28 Rowe I, 4n. 1: If, 28.29

12) qu)

662

Fic. 307 ~ Assem. ΠῚ, Sondage 3 Assem. IV, Tomb M. 1

Rowe I, 4n.1;11, 29 Rowe I, 20-21 Fig. IX; II, 27,32

(112) 012)

665

WV

E

26

Fic. 308 — Assem. V, Tomb M. 2

Rowe I, 19 Fig. IV; II, 27,32

(182)

664

Fic. 309 - Assem. VI, Tomb M. 3

? Fig. X; I, 27 Figs. V-VIL

Fic. 310 — Assem. VII, Tomb M. 4

RoweI, 7-8 Fig. 111,27

aui

sus

Fic. 311 - Assem. VIII, Tomb M. 5

Rowe I, 19-20 Fig. V; 11,27

1102)

Fic. 312 - Assem. VIII, Tomb M. 5 ‘Over Sarco’ — Rowel, 19-20 Fig. VIL, 27

1102)

668

669

m

Fig. 314 — Assem. IX, Tomb M. 5

Rowe I, 19-20 Fig. V; II, 28

(1102)

670

+13

mem

Fic. 315 - Assem. X, Tomb M. 9 Assem. XI, Tomb M.14

ΒονεῚ, 67 Fig. 111,22. 1,28 Rowe 8.9 Fig. I, 28

(1122) 113.2)

671

Fic. 316 - Assem. XII, Tomb M. 16

Rowe I, 25 Fig. XI; Il, 28, 32

(3.2)

672

„O —

os

186

Tic, 517 - Assem. XIII, Tomb E. 161 Crepidoma 3rd Sept. Rowe I1,5, 32, Fig IcIPLla Assem. XIV, Tomb E. 161-A Annexe 4th-7th Sept. Rowe IL, 5 13, 23 Fig, [PL

673

Fic. 318 ~ Assem. XIV Tomb E. 161-A Annexe 4-7th Sept.

Rowe Il, 5, 13, 23 Fig. IPl, le

0192)

674

Fic, 319 — Assem. XIV Tomb E. 161-A Annexe 4-7th Sept. — Rowe II, 5, 13,23 Fig. IPL. 2a-¢

(1192)

675

Fic, 320~Assem. XV Tomb E. 161 4-7th Sept.

Rowe II, 5, 13, 22 Fig. LII, Pl. 1b-c.

192)

616

Tr | ἽΝ

i

ΜΙ͂Ν

(il. = Il

IA

imo Fic. 321 - Assem. XVI Tomb E. 161 14-15th Sept.

Rowe If, 5, 22-23, 32 Fig. LIL

(192)

677

Asem XVIIA, TombE 161. Rowe I, 5,23 Fig. 1

~

(1.92)

—

‘Asem. XVIIB, Tomb F.161

Rowe I, 5,3 Fig. I (1.92)

Fic, 322 - Assem. XVIIA, Tomb E. 161 Shaft 17-19th Sept. Assem. XVIIB, Tomb E. 161 ‘Main Tomb’ 19-20th Sept. Assem. XVIII, Tomb F. 161 Southern Room 14-15th Sept.

Rowe If, 5,23 Fig. I Rowe Il,5, 23 Fig. I Rowe II, 5 unpublished; Fig. I

192) (192) (192)

678

20,

V p» τοῦ

Fic. 323 - Assem. XIX, Tomb N. 198 Forecourt 26th Sept. Rove IL 6, Figs, V-VIIPls.3a,b Assem. XX, Tomb N. 198A ‘Coffin’ 26th Sept. Rowe I, 6 Fig. VII; PL 3b

(1.72) (172)

679

m

Fic, 324 — Assem. XXII, Tomb N. 198A Slab Y3rdOct — Rowe Il, 6, 14 Fig. VIT; PL 4 Assem. XXIII, Tomb N, 198A Forecourt 30th Sept. Rowe II, 6 Fig. VII

(172) 17.2)

682

Fic, 327 - Assem. XXIV, Tomb N. 198 Loc. 130th Sept. — Rowe II, 6, 23 Figs. V.VILPLóa

(17.2)

JA

Fic. 331 - Assem. XXV, Tomb N. 198 Loc. 29-10th Oct.

Rowell, 6, 13-14 Figs. V-VIIPL 3c

(0172)

687

»,

361

Fic. 332 ~ Assem. XXVI, Tomb N. 198 Loc. 2 9-10th Oct.

Rowe II, 6 unpublished, Figs.

V-VIL

(172)

Fi ΧΡ 12,138

Assem. XXVILCN. 85.

{{Π|7.2)

dem

Assem.XXX,N.85$

Rowell,11, 17,22. 1,24 Fig. XP. 5e, De, lé

Fic. 333 Assem XXVILC,N.8-D ‘Assem. XXX, N. 8-5

(1.62)

Rowell,11, 17 Fig. X, Pls. 12c, 13a Rowe If, 11, 17,22. 1,24 Fig. X, Pls.5c, Dc 144

(1152) (IIL62)

689

Sous 387

Sousa 385

Sous 388,

Fic. 334 — Assem. XXXI, N. 8-R.

Rowe If, 11, 17,31 Figs. X, Pls 12c, 13a, 4a

62)

Sousa 408

«βου

} — — LU

Fig, 335 — Assem. XXXII, N. 83S Assem, XXXIII, N. 83-Y

Sousa 410

Rowe If, 11Fig. X, Pl. 5c Rowe If, 11, 17 Fig. X, Pl. 12b

(1Π|62) {Π|72)

691

Sousa 414

Sou 422 °

Fic. 336 - Assem. XXXIV, N. 83-5.

Sousa 415

Sem

Rowe Il, 11, 17 Fig. X, Pls. 5e, 13a, 14a

(1.62)

692

693

Fic. 338 — Asem. XXXVII, N. 83-5 Assem, XXXVII, N. 83-AB

Rowe IL, 11, 17, 30 Fig. X, Pls. 5c, 13c Rowe If, 11,26 Fig. X

(1.62) (172)

9a

M460 Assem. XXXIX,N.83:W

Rowell, 11,17,31 Fig. XPls bise

(1.92)

(461-479)

Fig. 339— Assem. XXXIX,N.8>W Assem. XL, N. 83:.W

Rowe If, 11, 17, 31 Fig. X, Pls. 5b, 13c Rowe IL, 11 Fig. X

192) 92)

695

Sousa 490

IN Sousa 496 m

Sousa 501 E ° Assem. XLLN.SMAW

sem

Rowell,11,17 Fig XPls 56, Dada

‘Asser. XLII, N.83-AK Rowe Il, 11,17 Fig. X, BL 13a ‘Asser. XLIV,Ν. 85.ΑΙ — Rowell, 11,24,30Fig. X

Fig. 340 — Assem. XLI, N. 83-W. Assem. XLIIL, N. 83-AK

Assem. XLIV, N. 8-AT

(11.92)

au.s2) cm 82)

Rowe II, 11, 17 Fig. X, Pls. 5b, 13a, 14a Rowe IL 11, 17 Fig. X, Pl. 13a

Rowe II, 11, 24, 30 Fig. X

{1Π|92) 1.82)

(82)

ow

Mois

Fic. 341 - Assem. XLVI, N. 83-AP Assem. XLVIII, N. 83-AN ‘Asem. XLIX,N. 83-AV

Rowe Il, 11, 24,32 Fig. X Rowe IL Fig. X Rowe ΠῚ 11, 17, 26, 30 Fig. X.

(172) {Π|82) (0182)

697

E Ascem.L.N.83-AW

Rowell,11,17 Fig XPL 142

{Π||82)

᾿ς

/ > GN

AsemLLN.S22

Fic. 342 ~ Assem. L, N. 83-AW Assem. LI, N. 8 Assi 83-AN

Assem. LIII, N. 83-AV

Rowell, 9,17 Fig. X,Pl 4a

RoweIf, Rowe Π Rowe IL Rowe If,

{Π|15.2}

11, 17 Fig, 9, 17 Fig. 11, 17 Fig. 11, 17 Fig.

X Pl 14a X PL 14a X Pl 130 X Pl. B3c

(182) 11152) 32) 82)

698

‘Asser. LIV,N.85-AZ

Rowell, 11,17 Fig. XP 12,130

(lL 8.2)

O—

Sousa 531 AsemlV,N.SRAV

Rowell, 11, 17,30Fig.XPls 12¢,13a, 14a

(IHL 8.2)

0

Fic. 343 — Assem. LIV, N. 83-AZ Assem. LV, N. 83-AV Assem. LVI, N. 83-BB

Rowe If, 11, 17 Fig. X Pls. 12c, 13a Rowe II, 11, 17, 30 Fig. X Pls. 12c, 13a, 14a Rowe If, 12, 17 Fig. XPl. 13a

sem

{182} (1.82) (1.82)

699

uns © ‘Assem. LVU,N.83:AV

Rowell 1,30 Fig. X

au.s2)

°

E AsemIVILN.824

Rowell, 9,17 Pi X PL. Be

ἀπ 82)

Sousa 346 +651) ‘Assem. LIX,N.8-BK

Rowell, 12,25 Figs, XXII PL 6a,

(Il 102)

n

E Sousa 553

Fic. 344 — Assem. LVII, N. 83-AV Assem. LVIIT, N. 824 Assem. LIX, N. 83-BK. Assem. LX, N. 83-BF Loc. 1

Rowe If, 11, 30 Fig. X Rowe II, 9, 17 Fig. X Pl. 13ς Rowe IL 12, 25 Figs. X-XII Pl 6a, b Rowe II, 12, 25 Figs. X-XIPI, Τὰ

Sem

700

‘Assom.LXI,N.8}-BF Loe.2

Rowell, 12,25 Figs. XXIPL7a

Ul.32) Sousa 569

Sousa 0567

Sous (568) Assem. LXIL,N.8BFLos.3

Rowell, 12,23 Figs X-XIPL 7a

(IL3.2)

XO asm en

Fic, 345 - Assem. LXI,N. 83-BF Loc.2 Assem. LXIL, N. 83-BF Loc. 3 Assem. LXIII, N. 83-BF Loc. 4

Rowe Il, 12,25 Figs. X-XIPl. 7a Rowe II, 12,25 Figs. X-XI Pl. 7a Rowe II, 12, 25 Figs. X-XIPL 7a

701

3E

^y

Ya

OS

ND

S

T

| >”

606

Fic. 346 - Assem. LXIV, N. 83-BI

Rowe IL, 12, 14 Figs. X-XII Pls. 6a, 8a, b

(111.102)

702

Fic. 347 - Assem. LXIV, N. 83-BI

Rowe I, 12, 14 Figs. X-XII Pls. Ga, 8a

11102)

Assem. LXIV,N.3-BI

os

Rowell 12,14 Figs. XXIPls. 6,66

ÜIL102)

[E

E

E 9

Fic. 348 - Assem. LXIV, N. 83-BI Assem. LXV, N. 8-BG.

Rowe I, 12, 14 Figs. X-XII Pls. 6a, 8b Rowe II, 12, 14-15 Figs. X-XII Pls. 8c, 9a-c

(11102) 1.102)

704

(Cy

Fic. 349 - Assem. LXV, N. 83-BG

After Gill C

Rowe II, 12, 14-15 Figs. X-XII Pls. 8c,9a, b

L7

11.102)

705

or

After Gil

Moss

After Gill

Fic. 350 - Assem. LXV, N. 83-BG

659

Rowe II, 12, 14-15 Figs. X-XII Pls. 8¢,9a

(102)

706

E

4 E

ο

Fic. 351 - Assem. LIV, N. 83-BG

som

Rowe II, 12, 14 Figs. X-XII Pls. 8¢,9a

(11.102)

708

(corm (corm

HSEGS N ἸΑΧΊ wOssy DIEN AXT WOSSY- ἐς “OLE

709 (orm aoordsnuong ‘fd IKK SEN 9 3497 ‘ZT TNO,

ΗΒ ΒΝ TAXT WSSy = pce “OT

710

Bi

XO 64 bie mE

Fic. 355 - Assem. LXVI, N. 83-BH

Afer Gil

Rowe II, 12, 15-16 Figs. X-XI Pl. 10b, 11a

11.02)

ΚΣ El

22

ys

Et 2227

S S N

E

Y 77

S

€

LI

Fic. 356 - Assem. LXVI, N. 83-BH

Rowe Il, 12, 15-16 Figs. X-XII PL τος

1.102)

os

Fic, 397 - Assem. LXVI, N. 85-BH

Rowe II, 12, 15-16 Figs.

X-XII Pls. 10c, 11a

1.102)

713

Fic. 358 - Assem. LXVI, N. 83-BH.

Rowe II, 12, 15-16 Figs. X-XII Pls. 10a, b, 11a.

1.102)

714

e [4 -

M.708)

» no

m3

-

vnl

NN

4 Sousa 718

Fic. 359 - Assem. LXVI, N. 83-BH

Rowe If, 12, 15,26 Figs.

X-XII Pl, 102, b

{1102}

716

Fic. 361 - Assem. LXVI, N. 83-BJ

Rowe If, 12, 14, 16 Figs. X-XIPls. 7b, 118,12.

(IIL10.2)

θὺ

Fic. 362 - Assem. LXVII, N. 85:8]

Rowe II, 12, 16-17 Figs. X-XII Pls. 7b, 11b, 12a

1102)

718

M» Tüipol 762 760

Fic. 363 ~ Assem. LXVII, N. 85:8}

Rowe II, 12, 16-17 Figs. X-XII Pl. 12a

1.102)

719

Mme

Fic, 364—Assem. LXVII, N. 83-BJ

ΛΟ

Ὁ

Se

Rowe II, 12, 16-17,22 Figs. X-XIL Pls. 11b, 122, 40a,b

(ΠΠ.10.2)

720

Fic, 365 - Assem. LXVII, N. 83-BJ

Rowe II, 12, 16 Figs. X-XILPL. 11b

1.102)

721

Fic. 366 - Assem. LXVII, N. 83:8}.

Rowe II, 12, 16, 32 Figs.

X-XILPL 11b, 12a

(11.102)

722 -]

Sousa 807

a

oO Sousa 816

Sousa 820

sn

Rowe Il, 12, 25, 30 Fig. X Pl. 6b Fic. 367 — Assem. LXVIII, N. 83-BM Assem.LXIX, N. 81-B Lower Enclosure — Rowell,12, 18 Fig. X Pl. 14b.

(52) Q0L172)

723

Fic, 368 - Assem. LXXI, N. 83-BQ

Rowe Il, 12, 25 Fig. XIV Pl. 22a

(1.112)

724

Tripoli 36

Fic, 369 - Assem. LXXII, N. 83-BN

Rowe If, 12,25 Fig. XIV

{π|11.2)

sat

AsemLXXILN.8-BU

Rowell, 12,25 Fig. XIVPL.22a

set

(lll. 11.2),

ῷ

ΠῚ

ΠῚ

T .| @ Fic. 370 - Assem. LXXIII, N. 83-BU Assem. LXXIV, N. 82 Assem. LXXV, N. 825

Rowe II, 12, 25 Fig. XIV Pl. 22a Rowe II, 9, 22,24 Fig. XIV Pls. 41a, b, 42b. Rowe I, 5, 32 Fig. XIV

6 {Π.11.2) (11122) 352)

726

Fig. 371 - Assem. LXXVI, N.83-BT

Rowe II, 12, 19, 21.22 Fig. XIV Pls. 22a, 25ς, 36a, 390), (IIL112)

727

867 se Assem, LXXVI, N. 83-81

Rowe Il, 1,19,21:22 is. 22, 25¢, 36a, 396

G2)

Fic. 372 - Assem. LXXVI, N. 83-BT Rowe II, 12, 19, 21-22 Fig. XIV Pls. 22a, 25c, 36a, 39b. Asse. LXXVI, N. 82

Rowe II, 9,32, Fig. XIV Pls. 41a, b.

(11.112) m2)

728

876

Fic. 373 ~ Assem. LXXVIII, N. 83-BS — RowelL, 12, 21-2 Fig. XIV Pls. 22a, 33b, 36a, 396,

(IL112)

729

Fic. 374 — Assem. LXXVIIL, N.8-BS

Rowe II, 12, 21-22 Fig, XIV Pls. 22a, 33ς, 38ς, 395. (11.112)

730

Fic. 375 - Assem. LXXIX, (N. 83-BS- BP) Assem. LXXX, N. 83-BP

Rowe If, 12, 14 Pl. 22a Rowe IL, 12,14 Pl. 22a

{Π11.2) [ns

731

011122)

732

Fic. 377 - Assem. LXXXII, N. 81-5.

Rowe II, 7, 20-21 Fig. XIV Pls. 31a, 34c

(1.17.2)

733

925, 934

‘Assem. LXXXIII,N.81-C — RowelL7,20Fig XIVPL 312.

Fic. 378 - Assem. LXXXIII, N. 81-C Assem. LXXXIV, N. I-A, Grave (d), e.

(INL 21.2)

Rowe II, 20 Fig. XIV Pl. 31a Rowe I, 8, 23 Fig. X

|

212) 11172)

734.

Asem XXXIV, N. δι Α, Grave (d,e

su AsesIXXXVON SA Ge

Rowell, 78,29 Fg X — (LUZ)

PIO Rowell, 8,23Fg.X — (2

E

90v Fic. 379 - Assem, LXXXIV, N. 81-A, Grave (d),e Rowe Il, 7-8, 23 Fig. X Assem. LXXXV, N. 81-A, Gravef Assem. LXXXVII, N. 81-A, Grave f

Rowe II, 8,25 Fig. X Rowe IL, 7,25 Fig. XIV

1.172)

(1172) 1.172)

735

co

„

Fic. 380 - Assem. LXXXVIIT, N. 81-A, Hall

t] Rowe II, 8,21,23 Fig. X Pl. 330

? (1.172)

736

‘Assem. LXXXIX,N.8L-A, Grave g Assem. XC, N. 82

Rowell, 8,23 Fig. Rowell 12,32 ig. XIV Pl 41b,

Fic, 381 - Assem. LXXXIX, N.81-A,Graveg Assem. XC, N. 82 Assem. XCI, N. 81-B Upper Enclosure.

aua (IL 122)

Rowe Il, 8, 23 Fig. X Rowe II, 12, 32 Fig. XIV Pls. 41b, c. If, 7, 23 Fig. XIV Pl. 22c Rowe

1172) (01122) (11202)

Fic. 382 ~ Assem. XCI, N. 81-B Upper Enclosure

Rowe II, 7, 23 Fig. XIV Pl. 22¢

(11202)

738

Fic. 383 - Assem. XCI, N. 81-B Upper Enclosure

Rowe II, 7, 23-24 Fig. XIV Pl. 22¢

(11202)

739

»

Assem. XCII, N. 81K Assem. ΧΟΠῚ, N. 82 Hall

Rosette AW He aan quas tcx qug ἢ E

|

‘Tripoli 1000

Fic, 384 - Assem. XCII, N.81-K Assem. XCIII,N. 82 Hall Assem. XCIV, N. 8I-K.

Rowe Il, 8, 24 Fig. XIV Pl. 22b, 23a Rowe If, 9, 24 Fig. XIV PL 41c. Rowe If, 8, 24 Fig, XIV PL 22b, 23a

212) (1.122) (0212)

740

Fic, 385 - Assem. XCV, N. 81-Β Upper Enclosure

Rowe Π,

7,20 Fig. XIV Pls.226,3la — (IIL202)

741

Fic. 386~ Assem. XCV, N. 81-B Upper Enclosure

Rowe II, 7, 32 Fig. XIV Pl. 22¢

(111202)

742

Fic, 387 - Assem. XCV, N. 8B Upper Enclosure

Rowe Il, 7 Fig. XIV Pl. 22¢

1:202)

743

Fic, 388. Assem. XCV, N. 81-B Upper Enclosure

Rowe II, 7, 20 Fig. XIV PL 30a

(11202)

744

Fic. 389 — Assem. XCVI, N. 81-0

Rove II, 8, 21-22 Fig. XIV Pls. 33c, 38¢

182)

745 wiz 982 “PLE Id AIX Sd OZ

‘LT 2MOY

smsopug ^o] 8:18 Ν ΠΛΌΧ "uossy - O66 “OL

746

Fic. 391 — Assem. XCVILN. 81:8 Lower Enclosure

Rowe Il, 7 Unpublished

(11212)

747

Asse. XCVIILN. 81-5 Cremation

Rowe Il, 20 Fig. XIV Pls. 25b, 264

1.2.2)

1049 1048

Fic. 392 — Assem. XCVIIT, N. 81-B Cremation Assem, XCIX N. 81-B Lower Enclosure

Rowe I, 20 Fig. XIV Pls. 25b, 26a Rowe Il, 7,20, 22, 26, 32 Fig. XIV PL. 38 c

(11212) (1212)

748

Fic, 393 - Assem. XCIX, N.81-B Lower Endlosure

Rowe If, 7, 20, 22, Fig. XIV Pl.38c

(1212)

749

1067

1070 1073

Fic. 394 - Assem. C, (N. 81-L)

°

sem

Rowe IL, 8, 20 Fig. XIV

(11202)

750

Fic. 395 - Assem. CI, N. 811,

Rowe IL, 8, 22 Fig. XIV PI. 38c, 39

(111202)

751

Fic. 396 - Assem. CII, N. 81.0 Assem. CHI, N. 81]

Rowe II 8 Fig, XIV Rowe II, 8,21 Fig. XIV Pls. 33b, 33¢

(L182) (01212)

zem

vem

E

TZ LI noy

ARTS N ‘TAD "uessy - 866 “OLY

755

1100

1102

m M. 10986 ‘Assem. CVLN. SLBB Assem. CVILN, SI. Assem. CVITL N. 81-8 Upper Enelosure

Rowell 7 Unpublished Fig. XIV. (00.222) Rowell, 8.24 Τρ XIV PLi9b — (202 Rowe Il,7 ig. XEV Pl. 158, (LL 202)

Fic, 400 - Assem. CVI, N. 81-BB Rowe Il, 7 Unpublished Fig. XIV Assem. CVI N. 81-W Rowe If, 8, 24 Fig. XIV PI. 19b Assem. CVIIL N. 81-B Upper Enclosure ^ Rowell,7 Fig. XIV PI. 19a, b. Assem. CIX, N. 82-83

Rowe IT, 9, 21-22 Fig, XIV Pls. 33b, 38¢, 42a

q1222) (11202) (111202)

(11.132)

756

n

Amen CIXN.8223

Rowe Il, 921.22 Fig, XIV Pl 33b, 58ς, 42e

Fic. 401 - Assem. CIX, N. 82-23 ‘Assem. CX, (N. 81-2)

(IL. 13.2)

Rowe Il, 9, 21-22 Fig. XIV Pls. 33, 38e,42e

Rowe II, 8,

Fig. XIVPl. 21a

(1132)

(11222)

757

=r

tall

j EE T

Assem.CXI,N.822 — Rowell,9,24,PL.C

T

T rur

(lll. 13.2)

1128

Fic. 402 - Assem. CXI, N. 8223 Assem. CXII, N. 81-AA Assem. CXIII, N. 8225

j

Rowe II, 9, 24 P C. Rowe II, 8, 24 Fig. XIV Pl. 21a Rowe I, 9 Fig. X

=

quii) (111222) L132)

758

FiG. 403 — Assem. CXIV, N. 81-KK

Rowe Il, 8, 20, 24, 32 Fig. XIV Pl. 306

(1123.2)

759

Fic. 404 - Assem. CV, N. 81-1

Rowe Il, 8,21 Fig, XIV Pl. 33c.

(1.24.2)

Fic. 405 - Assem. CV, N. SLIT

Rowe If, 8, 21 Fig. XIV PL33c.

(11242)

‘Assem. CXVIL,N.SIBB

0

Rowell, 8Fig. ΧΙΝ Pls 184,b,32 — (1222)

sem

Fic. 406 - Assem. CXVI, N. SKK. Assem. CXVII, N. SI-BB. Assem. CXVIII, N. SI-KK.

Rowe II, 8, 20, 32 Fig. XIV Pls. 18b,30b,31b — (11232) Rowe II, 8 Fig. XIV Pls. 18a, b, 32b (1222) Rowe II, 8,21 Fig. XIV Pls. 18b, 37d, e (01232)

762

Fic. 407 - Assem. CXVIII, N. 81-KK

Rowe II, 8,21 Fig. XIV Pls. 18b, 31a

11232)

763

Fic. 408 - Assem. CXIX, N. 81-RR

Rowe II, 8, 20-21 Fig. XIV Pls. 26c, 33¢, 346

(11232)

767

Fic. 412 - Assem. CXXI, N. 8I-AC

Rowe Il, 8, 19 Fig. XIII, XIV Pl. 25a, b

(123.2)

768

οΤαροι 1207

ittis

N. 8LAC Tic. 413 - Assem. CXXI,

o

5m

Rowe I, 8, 18-19 Fig, XIV Pls. 24c, 25a, 36b.

1232)

769

1212

1215

q

«Τάροϊ 1218

Fic. 414 ~ Assem. CXXI, N. 81-AG

Rowe Ul, 8, 18-19 Fig. XIV Pls, 24c, 36b, 38b.

1232)

770

Fic. 415 - Assem. CXXI, N. LAC

Rowe II, 8, 18,21 Fig. XIV Pls. 24b-c, 35a

011252)

m

Fic. 416 -- Assem. CXXI, N. 81-AC

Rowe If, 8, 18,21 Fig. XIV Pls. 24b-c, 35a

(1:252)

712

1208c

-

1

(e=

B 6)

“Tripoli 1236

mar

Fig. 417 —Assem. CXXI,N.81-AC

Rowe II,8, 18, 21-22 Fig. XIV Pls. 24c, 33a, 39d

(m123.2)

m

M. 1247

1254 M52

After Gill

Fic. 418 - Assem. CXXI, N. SAC. Rowe II,8, 19-22 Fig. XIV Pls, 24c, 32a, 35b, 36d, 37b, 38b (IIL23.2)

774

Fic, 419 ~ Assem.CXXH,N.81-AB ^ — Rowell,S,21 Fig. XIV Pls. 18c, d, 37c

1.242)

775

1258)

Fic. 420 -- Assem. ΟΧΧΠῚ, N.81-AD

Rowe Il, 8, 20-21 Fig. XIV Pls. 26b, 32a, 34a,36e — (IIL23.2)

Fic, 421 - Assem. CXXIV,N.81-AB

Rowe If, 8,21 Fig. XIV PL 37c

(11242)

T

Tripoli 1279

1276

Fic. 422 - Asem. CXXIV,N.81-AB

p

um

Rowe II, 8, 21, 26 Fig. XIV Pl. 35¢

(11242)

718

are

Fic. 423 -- Assem. CXXIV, N. 81-AB

Rowe II, 8 21, 22, 26 Fig. XIV Pls. 35c, 37a, 39a

(11242)

719

Fic. 424 - Assem. CXXV, N.81-AN

Rowe II, 9, 20-21, 26 Fig, XIV Pls. 31e, 37¢

i162)

781

Ma»ij

Fic. 426 - Assem. CXXVII, N. 81-TT Assem, CXXVIII, N. 81-AI Assem. CXXIX, N. SLAN

Rowe TI, 8, 24 Fig, XIV PL. 21b Rowe II, 9, 24 Fig, XIV PL 18c Rowe II, 9, 20 Fig, XIV PL. 29

(252) (11242) (1.162)

APPENDIX

EXCAVATION LIST

Assemblage Figure Sarcophagus Trenches 1-3 Sondagel I 306 Sondage2 U Sondage? IT 307 Tomb N. 383, Rowe's M.1 Monument4 IV — 307 Tomb N.202, Rowe's M. 2

Reg. No. M 15 630 3136 3753

308

54-62

Tomb N. 197, Rowe's M. 5 Loculus3 — VI 3809

63-102

Chamber

v

Tomb E. 174, Rowe's M. 4 Cist 2

vi

510

Assemblage Figure Tomb E.19, Rowe's M5 Above va on sarcophagus VII 312 Inside sarcophagus

ΙΧ IX

Reg. No. M 116-126 12lah

3D 5314

127-1362-c (137)-151

Tomb S. 80, Rowe's M. 9. x 315

152.155

Tomb S. 77, Rowe's M. 14 Cung, 1

ΧΙ

315

156

Tomb N. 13, Rowe's M. 16 103-115

Loculusi

— XH

316

157-(174)

784

Fig. 306 Assemblage I, Sondage 1 Rowe II, 4 n. 1; 11,28 Reg. 1Lb Lamp 6) Bg Lamp

Reg.

2 Bg Hydria frag 4-5 unknown

Assemblage II, Sondage 2 Rowe I, 4 n.1; II 28-29 Reg. 6IbH.25D.60 8Lb Jar 10 unknown (12) Bg Lamp 1418 H.9.0D.6.2 16 Lb Juglet

11 Tc Burial Cover DLbH.123D.42 15 Lb Juglet 17 Lb Model vase

18-19 unknown 21-24 unknown.

20 FeL.7.6 25RdH.17L.87

26.30 unknown. Fig. 307 Assemblage III, Sondage 3 Rowe I, 4 n.1;II,29 Reg. 31BgH.351.92 33 Bg Lamp.

35 unknown

L12)

Reg. 32 Bg Lamp 34 Lb Small bow! 36 unknown

Assemblage IV, Tomb M.1

(1.1.2)

Rowe I, 20-21 Fig. IX; II, 27,32

Reg.

37 Tc Tile 39LbH.3.0L.7.2 41-44 unknown.

46 Rd H.5.8 49 FeL.4.8 51 Lapis lazuli bead. Fig. 308 Assemblage V, Tomb M. 2 Rowe I, 19 Fig. IV; 11,27, 32 Reg. 54 Coin. 5658 unknown 59c Rf Kalpis handle 61 unknown. Fig. 309 Assemblage VI, Tomb M. 3 Rowe I, 22 Fig. X; II, 27 Fig. V-VIL Reg. 63 unknown.

65 Lb 67 Lb 69-71 73 Ae

Oinochoe Figurine unknown Leaves, wire frags

Cat. 102 212

40 Lamp 45 Lb H. 6.0 47-48 unknown 50 Flint blade 52-53 Coins Healy addendum 16

Reg. 55 Ag IntaglioL. 2.1 D. 26 59a, b RE frags 60 Lb H. 3.8.9.0 621LbH.2.2D.85

Reg. 64 unknown 66 FeL.4.7 68 Cremation, 72 Tc 148 ‘berries’

74 Sg Lachrymateria

785 75 Tc Flowers 77 Fe Bracelet

12 m

79 Ivory Hairpin

40

81 Fe Nail 83 unknown 85 unknown

21 -

87 Bf Panathenaic amphora 89 TcH. 9.0+ 91 unknown

52b Bg Hydria handle 93 Bg Hydria rim frag 96 Lb Unguent pot 99 Lb Four juglets Fig. 310 Assemblage VIT, Tomb M. 4 Rowe I, 7-8 Fig. I; 1,27 Reg. 103 Libyan, frag 105 Libyan, frag 107 Libyan, frag 109 Lb H.77 11 LbH.82 113 Rd Bowl 115 Lb H. 3.1L. 7.6 Fig. 311 Assemblage VIII, Tomb M. 5 Rowe I, 19-20 Fig. V; II, 27 Reg. 116Lb Lid 118 Lb Juglet 120 unknown 122 Ae Frag 124-126 unknown

3

155 -

n τι -

76 unknown 78 unknown 80 Ae Mirror, broken 82 Fe Rivetted metal 84 Ivory Cosmetic pot 86 Sg H. 118 88 unknown 90 Lb Figurine frags 32a Bg Hydria handle 92c Bg Hydria lid 94-95 unknown 97-98 unknown 100-102 part of 99 (1.11.2)

Cat. 150 150 150 202 202 212 225

Reg. 104 Libyan, frag 106 Libyan, frag 108 unknown

(110) Amphora 112 Rd H. 4.5D. base 3.2 114 Lb H. 194 D. 13.0

Cat. 192 -

Rowe I, 19-20 Fig. V; II, 27

Reg.

121a-h Bf Panathenaic amphora fragments

Reg. 127 Ce H.214 (129) Lb Bowl 151 Bg H. 60 0.5.4 133 Lb H.3.6D.9.7 135 Lb B5.9 D.8.0

Fig. 314 Assemblage IX, Tomb M. 5 Rowe I, 19.20 Fig. V; II, 28 Reg. (137) Lb Olpe

178 206 175 1.102)

Reg.

117 119 121 123

Lb H. 184 D. 13.0 Bg Hydria frag Bf frags (cf Fig. 8) Sg frags

Fig. 312 Assemblage VIII, Tomb M.5 ‘Over Sarco’

Fig. 313 Assemblage IX, Tomb M.5 ‘Sarco’ RoweI, 19-20 Fig. V; II, 28 Pl. 27c

Cat. 150 150

Cat. 175 9 43 1102)

Cat. 43 (1.102)

Cat. 39 212 93 212 191

Reg. 128LbH. 123 D.3.6 130 Bg frag 132 Bg H.7.8D.25 (134) Lb Bowl 136a-e Five Oinochoai

Cat. 198 7 85 212 202 (1.10.2)

Cat. 202

Reg. (138) Lb Oinochoe

Cat. 232

786

(140) Lb Olpe

139 Rd H. 5.0 D. 65 141 Lb H. 35 L. 94 143 Bg H.21L.82 145 Fe L. 65 D.34 147-148 unknown 150Lb H. 13.8 D. 5.8

142 Bg H. 2.6L. 7.4 144a,b, c Fe H. 60 D. 8.4 146 Fe L. 6.0

149 Lb Lamp

151 Bg H.5.2D.3.1 (1.122)

Fig. 315 Assemblage X, Tomb M.9 Rowe I, 6-7 Fig. 11,22 n.1, 28 Reg. 152 Mb fluted column 154 unknown

Reg. 153 Bg H.7.5L. 19.8 155 Lb Libyan pottery

Assemblage XI, Tomb M. 14 Rowe I, 8-9 Fig. I; I,28 Reg. 156 Bg Frags of pottery

Fig. 316 Assemblage XII, Tomb M. 16 Rowe I, 23 Fig. XI; II, 28, 32 Reg. 157 Tc 402 ‘berries’ (159-161) Bowls

163 Faience "2 ball heads (165) Lamp (167) Lb Olpe frag (169) Lb Olpe. 171 Bg H. 3.0 D. 65 (173) Lb Bowl.

Cat. 91 150 (1132)

(132) Cat. 12 212

Last registered object for 1952 season was 174

225 201 201 92 212

Reg.

158 Bg Hydria frag 162 Coin Healy addendum (164) Lamps 166 Lb 2 heads H. 3.9 168 Lb H. 5.0L. 5.0 170 Lb H. 115+ 172 Rd H. 7.6 D. 44 (174) Unguentarium

Cat. 7 15 225 155 167 215 201 216

787

EXCAVATION LIST Assemblage

Figure

Reg. No. M

Tomb E. 160, Rowe's E. 161-A Compartments XIV — 31731 Unprovenanced XVII 322

317 320

Southern Room Shaft Main Tomb

321 322 322

| XVI XVIIA XVIIB

Figure

Reg. No. M.

Tomb N. 197, Rowe's N. 198 177-192 225.238

Tomb E. 161, Rowe's E. 161

SE.Comer XI North Projection XV

Assemblage

175-176 193-204 205211 212214 215-224

Loc. 1

Courtyard Loculus 1

ΧΧΙ

XX XXIV

323 323 325327

Loculus 2 Unprovenanced

XXV XXVI

328331 332

Coffin Slab Y

XX XXI

5323 324

Slab X

XXII

324

239-258

(261)

281314 315355 354364

Tomb N. 198A.

259.260 262-272 273-280

788

Fig. 317 Assemblage XIII, Tomb E.161 Crepidoma 3rd Sept. Rowe If, 5, 32 Fig. I Pl. la. Reg. Cat. Reg. 175 Coin Healy addendum 16 176 Ae Coin Fig. Assemblage XIV, Tomb E. 161-A Annexe 4th-7th Sept. Rowe Il, 5, 13, 23 Fig. IPL 1c Reg. Cat. Reg. 17 Tae Bf frags 5 186 part of 177b. Fig. 318 Assemblage XIV, Tomb E. 161-A Annexe 4th-7th Sept. Rowe Il, 5, 13,23 Fig. IP. 1c Reg. Cat. Reg. 178 RE joins 232, part of 214 51 179 Uw ‘small lamp" 180 Pw joins 191 124 181 Bg frag joins 231 182 Bg Oinochoe frag m 183 PbL.7.8W. 3.6 Th. 0.2 184 Sg Frag of glass’ Fig. 319 Assemblage XIV, Tomb E. 161-A Annexe 4th-7th Sept. Rowe II,5, 13,23 Fig. I Pls. 2a-c Reg. Cat. Reg. 185 Mb H. 45.0 W. 243 185 Mb part of (185 bis) 186 Bf part of 177b 43 187a Bg frag 187b Bg frag 95 187c Bg frag 187d Bg frag 102 187e Uw frag 188 Bg frag 85 189 Bg frag 190 Mb frag 241 191 Pv joins 180 192 Peridot 37 Fig. 320 Assemblage XV, Tomb E. 161 North Projection 4th-7th Sept. Rowe Il, 5, 13, 22 Fig. LII, Pl. tb-c Reg. Cat. Reg. 193 Ls cornice moulding 246 194 Ls cornice moulding 195 Black granite 242 196 Bg ‘fragments’ 197 Sg Si Peridot ‘discarded 37 198 Bg ‘fragments’ 199 Bg "fragments 200a Bg frag 200b Bg frag 95 200c Bg frag 200d Bg frag. 14 200. Bg frag 200f Bg frag 114 200g Bg frag 201 Mb ‘drapery’ 202 Mb shaft 203 Mb staff 238 204 Uw ‘fragments?

205 Sg ‘base of glass drinking cup’

(192) Cat, 16 (192) Cat. 5 (192) Cat. 52 26 0192) Cat. 243 114 72 216 69 14 (1.92) Cat. 246 95 114 % 99 238 -

206 Object Register: location ‘161a’, a reference to tomb’s inner ring wall Rowe's ‘Wall a’ and not, as published, from the Southern Room (Fig. 274). Fig. 321 Assemblage XVI Tomb E. 161

Southern Room 14th-15th Sept. Rowe II, 5, 22-23, 32 Fig. I-II

Reg.

206 Pb L.6.2.W35 207b Ls frags

209 Bg Si frag, ‘stamped palmettes' 211 Pb L. 7.3 Th.0.7

Reg. 207a Ls frags 208 Mb frag 210 Lb H.37 L.100D.7.8

(192) Cat. 247 242 226

Fig. 322 Assemblage XVIIA, Tomb E. 161 Shaft 17th-19th Sept. Rowe Il, 5, 23 Fig. I Reg. Cat. Reg.

212 Mb ‘many small chips 214 Rf part of 178, 232

241

213 Coin Healy addendum

215 217 219 221 223

Rd Amphora frag Bg frags Ae Surigil frag Mb ‘chips’ Ls Si part of 194

Cat.

M 96 6 246

Reg. 216 Lb Amphora frag 218 Human bone frags 220ab Bg frags 222 Uw H.2.8D.2.5

224 Sg frag

Assemblage XVIII, Tomb E. 161 Southern Room 14th-15th Sept.

Rowe If, 5 unpublished; Fig. T

Reg. 225 Bg Si ‘many frags’ 227 Bg frags 229 Bg ‘several frags’ 231 Bg joins 181 233 Bg frag 235 Uw ‘frags’ 237 Bg frags

Cat.

16

51

Assemblage XVIIB, Tomb E. 161 ‘Main Tomb’ 19th-20th Sept. Rowe II, 5, 23 Fig. T Reg.

789 (119.2)

Cat. 114 52 “4 B 114

Reg. 226 Si Bg frag 228 Bg ‘rim frags (lekanis) 230 Uw frags ‘painted amphora’ 232 Rf joins 178 234 Bg frag 236 Bg Si ‘several frags’

(1.9.2)

Cat. 114 148 33 192) Cat. 70

Fig. 323 Assemblage XIX, Tomb N. 198 Forecourt 26th Sept. Rowe Il, 6, Fig. V-VII Pls. 3a, b

Reg. 238 Ls ‘stele frags’? 241 Uw frags ‘amphora’ 243 Pb Th. 0.2 245 Uw frag 247a Fe frag 2484 Bg frag 249 Uw Si ‘ribbed handle’ 250b Uw frag 250d Uw frag. 252 Uw frag 254 Uw frag

256 Uw Si ‘frags of handles’ 258 Bg 'small vase"

Cat. 248 27 216 21 72 188 187 225 186

E -

Assemblage XX, Tomb N. 198A ‘Coffin’ 26th Sept. Rowe II, 6 Fig. VII, Pl. 3b Reg. Cat. 260 Sg: bottle for scent?

Reg.

239 Uw Si joins 240 242 Fe Si ‘nail 244 Bg ‘nozzle of lamp’ 246 Ae Coin 247b Ae frag 248b Bg frag 250a Uw frag 250c Uw frag 251 Bg Si ‘base’ 253 Uw rim of bow! 255 Uw ‘handle? 257 Mb frag 259 Sg "Glass vase? (117.2)

Reg.

Unregistered Mb fragment

Cat. 242

260 Object Register: ‘Bottle for scent’ with a small drawing of a complete glass bottle may represent that found looseon the sectioned tray in Collection H. III. 0 i

i SgH.

29

790 but the Mb fragment found resting on finds label ‘M.260 Tomb.198 COFFIN’ in Collection H. 1.3 may not

have been registered

(172)

Assemblage XXI, Tomb N. 198 ‘Loc.’ 29th Sept.

Rowe II, 6 Fig. VII, Pl. 3b Reg. 261 Uw Si ‘shallow dish?

Cat.

Fig. 324 Assemblage XXII, Tomb N. 198A Slab Y 3rd Oct. Rowell, 6, 14 Fig. VII, Pl.4 Reg. Reg. Cat. 263 Ls H. 65 D. 9.7 262 Ls Slab Y 256 265 Lb H.5.8 256 264 Ls H.8.2D.9.7 267 Lb H. 4.2 266 Lb H. 5.9 218 234 269 Lb H. 6.2 268 Lb H.3.7 219 271 Lb H.3.2 270 Lb H. 3.6 Unreg. Ls Slab X left on site 272 SiLb H.3.9 218 Assemblage XXIII, Tomb N. 198A Forecourt 30th Sept.

Rowe II, 6 Fig. VII Reg.

273 Uw ‘frag bowl - Rim’ 275 Uw ‘Model Vase"

277 Uw ‘Upper part of Spindle Vase’ 279 Uw ‘Lower part of Spindle Vase?

Cat.

Reg. 274 Uw ‘frag bowl - Base’ 276 Bg ‘Frags - (Attic bydria?) 278 Uw ‘Lower part of Spindle Vase’

280 Uw ‘Base of pot?

Fig. 325 Assemblage XXIV, Tomb N. 198 Loc.1 30th Sept. Rowe II, 6, 23, 26 Fig. V-VII PI. 3a Reg. Cat. Reg. 192 281 UwH.2.1D.73 282 Uw Si ‘Base of pot’ 284 Bg frags 137 283 Uw frag 286 Uw Si ‘Part of model bowlor dish’ 285 Uw Si Part of bowl (2) with handle’ a 288 Rf frag 287 Rf frag 289b Uw frag 225 289a Uw frag 225 289d Uw frag 289c Uw frag 290 Bg Si ‘Vessel? 291 Bg ‘pot (2) with ribbed bandles* 209 293 Uw frag 292 UwH. 3.6 Dim 5.2 294 Uw H. 5.6 Dim2.9 219 295 Rd 215 2971bSIH.96 296 Uw 51 Η. 114 215 299 Lb Spindle vase 298 UwH. 9.1 300 Uw H. 6.1 216 301 Uw H. 9.0 302 Uw Si ‘Spindle vase"

(017.2)

Fig. 326 Assemblage XXIV, Tomb N. 198 Loc.1 30th Sept.

0172)

Rowe If, 6 Fig. V-VIT Pl. 3a

305 Si ‘Nails and frags of iron’ ; Object Register/maiby other frags, and part of fittings of wooden coffin’. Ylustrates item xxiii which is L. 10.4 W. 2.4 with loop complete when registered found stored in a large tin Collection H. IL5 which had lost its outside label for tuna in which were other iron items i-xxvii matching the above descriptions (Thorn (1994), 111, Fig. 7-8)

791

Reg. ixix Fe frags xxii Fe frags xxvxvi Fe frags

Cat. 21 18 a

Reg. xxxxi Ae xdiíi-xxiv Fe frags xxvii Fe frags

Fig. 327 Assemblage XXIV, Tomb N. 198 Loc. 1 30th Sept. Rowe II, 6, 23 Fig. V-VITPl. 3a Reg. Cat. Reg. 304. Te 12 304f Seeds 304g Sg, part of 306g 35 305a-e Tc. 305f Fe Wood frags 2 306g Sg, part of 304g 306h Sp, part of 304g 35 307a¢ Sg 12 308 Te flower buds

Cat. 15 20 2 (172) Cat. 265 12

E 37

309 Object Register: ‘Frags. tear-bottles’ may represent those items ii-viii stored in a sectioned tray in Collection H. IILS in a NAAFI tin of SAUSAGES shown in Fig. 25.

δεν Sg frag viii Sg frag 310 Oss D. 2.8 Th25 311b Ae Healyii 3124 Sg 3BaTe 313. Tc

28 32 40 16 36 156 155

vii Sg frag

29

311a Ae Healy 311c Ae Healy iii 312b Tc spinning top 3Db Tc 314 Ae wire frags

16 16 169 155 12

Fig, 328 Assemblage XXV, Tomb N. 198 Loc. 2 9th-10th Oct. 0723) Rowe II, 6,13,23 Fig. V-VILPI. 2c The newly found Object Register descriptions for 260 and 309 may be those represented as items i-viii with this figure, the evidence for which is given above under these numbers. Reg. Cat. Reg. Cat. 515a Te 19 buds 12 315b Te rosettes, none 12 315c Tc 11 fruit 315e Te 63 fruit

12 12

315d Tc 16 fruit 315f Seeds

12 265

315g Sg bead 35 316 Si ‘Glass fragments’, Object Register: ‘glass frags, from tear-bottles etc. including a spout’, probably a reference to item xiii with items ix-xvi stored in a sectioned tray Collection H. IIL3 in a NAAFI tin of POTATO MASH POWDER (Thorn (1994), 111 Fig. 7.8). ix Sg frag 28 x Sg frag 31 3: xiii Sg joins 317 28 xixii Sg frags 31 xv Sg frag 30 xiv Sg frag 32 317b Sg frag 33 xvi Sg frag 31 317 Object Register‘ Handle of vase’which joins item xiii represented here as 317a.

Fig. 329 Assemblage XXV, Tomb N. 198 Loc. 2 9th-10th Oct. Rowe II, 6, 14, 23 Fig. V-VII Pl. 3c Reg. Cat. Reg. 318 Pb Th.0.02

319 Ln Fe frags

27

20

319a-k Fe frags

172) Cat. 21

320 Object Register: ‘Frags of large: -- Mirror, 2 wires from funerary wreath; pendant (2); 4 nails etc? probably a reference to item iv which is a small disk mirror and items v-x which are elements belonging to the wreath probably Collection H. IIL4 contained in a NAAFI tin of MIXED FRUIT PUDDING (Thorn (1994), 111 Fig. 7-8)

792 ἵν Ae vi-viii Ae

το 12

iFe

20

1 14

vAe ix Ae

38 xSg 321 Object Register: "Miscellaneous: — (1) pieces of wire etc. (2) 2 ring-stones' referring to c4 for (1), elements as v-x above, and referring to a-b for (2). 14 321c Ae frag 37 321a-b Sg 12 521d4 Ae frags 323 Uw ‘Handle of incense por" 7 322 ΛΕ]. 15.0 B contained in a NAAFI tin of TREACLE Collection in found was ‘A small group of iron nails i-i because of this could represent a missing part and 319 to identical are condition their by These PUDDING. ‘of 320 as these arc in the same container used for similar items Fe

21

Fig. 330 Assemblage XXV, Tomb N. 198 Loc. 2 9th-10th Oct. (IL.7 2) Rowe II, 6, 13 Fig. V-VILPL3c Reg. Cat. Reg. b Uw H. 115 3252, 216 324 UwH.79 327 Uw H. 7.4 216 326 Uw H.7.6 329 Uv H.55 215 328 UwH.73 331 Uv H. 65 0.2.6 215 330 UwH. 3.6 333 Uw Juglet 205 332 UwH.8.0D.23 335 UwH. 7.1 201 334 UwH. 7.8 337 UwH.25D.78 81 336 Bg H.1.9D. 6.2 339 Uw H. 18.7.1 192 338 Uw H.3.4D.72 341 Uw Η. 3.9 0.9.4 212 340 Uw Η. 27 D. 84 343 SwH.5.8 342 Uw Si ‘amphora’ 345 Uw H.41D. 54 208 344 Uw H. 3.0.3.7

Cat. 215 145 216 203 203 192 192 212 143 206

Oct. Reg. 347 UwH.3.2L.82 349 Uw H. 2.0L. 7.7 351 UwH.3.6L.8.4 353 Uw frag

7.2) Cat. 225 225 225 225

Fig. 331 Assemblage XXV, Tomb N. 198 Loc. 2 9th-10th Rowe II, 6,13-14 Fig. V-VII Pl. 3c Cat. Reg. 225 346 Uw H. 3.1L. 82 225 348 Uw H.3.2L.85 225 Ὁν Η.351,.9.1 350 225 352 Uw frag

Fig. 332 Assemblage XXVI Tomb N. 198 Loc. 2 9th-10th Oct. Rowe II, 6 unpublished, Fig. V-VIL Reg. Cat. Reg. 355 Uw frag 172 354 Te frag Uw frag part of 357. 368 181 357. of part 356 Uw frag 357 ‘Part of shoulder of large bowl with loop handle (2 pieces)’, probably part of those above 360 Uw frag 179 359 Uw frag 362 Uw frag 179 361 Uw frag 364 Si Bowl 363 Bg Si Part of Amphora’

Last registered object for 1955 season was 364.

(172) Cat. 220 181 179 177 212

795 EXCAVATION LIST

Assemblage Graves Upper Group

Figure

N. 83-A

333 333 333

365.366 367368 369-370

333

373375

333 335 336 338

376-384 403 412.424 437-451

333 333 334

371 372 385-402

337

421-435

337 338 341 341 335

436 452-453 512 510511 405-411

339.340

454-502

340 340 341 343

504 505-507 508-509 528.529

NB ND

XXVILA

XXVILB — XXVILC

Reg. No. M

Assemblage Cinerary pit

— XXIX

517519

341 342 342 342 343 344 344 344

513514 5252-525b. 515516 526527 530.539 541542 540 543

342

520.524

340

503

Defined Area LXVIII 367 344 345 345 345

806.817 559.564 565.566 567-571 572-597

Enclosure N. 83-8

Sarcophagi N.83-1 N. 83-G N.8-R

Xxx xxxi xxxiv XXXVIE XXVIILA

XXVIILB XXXI

Enclosure N. 83-U

Sarcophagi N.83-AL N.83-AP N.8-Y

XXXV — XLVII XLVI XXXII

Enclosure N. 82-1

‘Tomb N. 83-BF

Enclosure N.83-BK

Enclosure N. 83-W XXXIX-XLI

Graves Lower Group. N.83-AK — XLI N.8-AT XLIV N8-AO — XLV N.83-AZ ΠΝ

Reg. No. M

542

Tomb N. 83

GraveG1

Figure

344 367

544-597 821-822

346-348 348353 353-360 361-366

599.627 628.676 677-744 745-805

Enclosure N. 81-B. 818-820

794

Fig. 333 Assemblage XXVILA, N. 83-A Rowe II, 11, 24 Fig. X, Reg. 365 Bg Lamp nozzle Assemblage XXVII-B, N. 85:8 Rowe If, 11 Fig. X Reg. 367 Uw frag spindle vase Assemblage XXVII-C, N. 83-D (IIL5.2) Rowe If, 11, 17 Fig. X, Pls. 12c, 13a Reg.

369 Bg H. 7.0 L. 16.9

Cat. -

Reg. (366) Oss frags

Cat.

Reg.

Cat.

Reg. 370 Bg

-

88

Assemblage XXVIILA, N. 83-1 (IIL6.2) Rowe Il, 11 Fig. X

Reg.

Cat.

H.27 L.9.8

Reg.

Cat.

-

371 Handle of pot

Assemblage XXVIILB, N. 83-G Rowe If, 11 Fig. X, Pl. 5c Reg.

372 Bg frag vase

(1.6.2) Cat.

-

Assemblage XXIX, N. 83 Grave G. 1 Rowe II, 10, 24 Fig. X Reg. 373 Lb Amphora handle 375 (Uw) Bowl frag Reg.

Cat. ur Cat.

Sousa

Reg.

Cat. (1.1.2)

Assemblage XXX, N. 83-S Rowe IL11, 17, 22 n. 1, 24 Fig, X, Pls. 5c, 13c, 14a 376 Tc H. 8.5 382 Te cluster of grapes 384 Ls H. 12.4D.5.2

368 frag vase

152 -

Reg. 374 Mb frag

Cat. 245 (1.6.2)

Reg. 377-381 Te frags body

383 LsH.65 W.7.2

Sousa

248

(1.6.2)

Fig. 334 Assemblage XXXI, N. 83-R.

Rowe II, 11, 17,31 Fig. X Pls. 12c, 13a, 14a Reg. Cat. 385 BgH.18L.11.0 — Sousa 101 387 389 Uw H. 11.5 Ὁ. 6.4.

Cat. 152 262

Sousa Sousa

391 unknown 393 UwH.3.41.7.6 397 UwH.85D.32 — Sousa 401 Fe Four nails

Fig. 335 Assemblage XXXII, N. 85:8, Rowe II, 11 Fig. X, Pl. 5c Reg. 403 Uw jug Sousa

196

u 216 225

-

Cat. -

Reg. 386 388 390 392

Bg H. Uw H. Uw Η. BgH.

10.6D. 6.6 13.0D. 8.0 129 D.95 2.2L. 6.4

Sousa Sousa

Cat. 93 196

394.396 unknown 398-400 unknown 402 Ac Healy ix

Reg.

404 Uw drinking cup

Cat.

795 Assemblage XXXIII, N. 83-Y Rowe II, 11, 17 Fig. X, Pl. 12b Reg. 405 Pw H. 240 D. 195 407 BgH.8.0D.9.5 ^ Sousa 409 Uw H. 60D. 13.4 411PwH.60D.9.9 — Sousa

Fig. 336 Assemblage XXXIV, N. 83-S Rowe II, 11,17 Fig. X Pls. 5c, 13a, 14a

Reg. 412 unknown. 413 Uv H.27D.82 415 UwH.6.0D.62 — Sousa 417 Bg H. 2.2.75 419 Te frags figurine 422BgH.25Dia65 Sousa 424 pottery

(1172) Cat. 120 89 211: Di

431 RE frag

Assemblage XXXVI, N. 83-AA Rowe If, 11 Fig. XP. 5 b,c

Reg.

436 Tc tile.

Fig. 338 Assemblage XXXVII, N. 83-8 Rowe II, 11, 17, 30 Fig. X Pls. 5c, 13c

Reg. 437 TcH.94 — Sousa 439 Tc hand. 441 Te frag shrine 443 Tc figurine. 445-447 Tc frags body 449 TcH.85 ^ Sousa 451 Ls H.9.1

Assemblage XXXVII, N. 83-AB Rowe II, 11, 26 Fig. X Reg. 452 Te frag male figurine Fig. 339 Assemblage XXXIX, N. 83-W Rowe Il, 11, 17,31 Fig. X Pls. 5b, I3c Reg. 454 Mb frag frieze

Cat. 101 127 11.6.2)

Cat. 212 191 102 μ Add. IT με

Fig. 337 Assemblage XXXV, N. 83-U Rowe IL, 11, 17, 18, 26,31 Fig. X Pls. 13a,14b

Reg. 421 Ae Healy x 426 Ls H.19.0W.15.5 — Sousa 428-429, 433-434 RE frags

Reg. 406 unknown 408BgH.L8L.73 ^ Sousa 410PWH.87L.47 Sousa

Reg.

Cat.

414 UwH.5.0D.82 — Sousa 416 Uw H. 67.3.8 418 Uw pottery 420 Ae handle 423BgH.201.88 ^ Sousa (UL7.2)

Cat. 16 259 52 52

Reg.

425 (Uw) juglet 421 RE frags 430, 432 Rf frags 435 Uw Model amphora

Cat. 52 48 {π|7.2)

Cat.

Reg.

Cat.

-

(62)

Cat. 152 B 164 258

Reg. 438 Te frag head 440 Tc dove 442 Ls frag body 444 Te aniconic head 448 Ac Healy vii 450

Tc H. 13.2

Cat.

16 154 (1172)

Cat. 7

Reg.

453 Te charm? Cupid?

Cat. (192)

Cat. -

Reg. 455 Ae Healy xi

Cat. 16

796

457 Aquamarine? Glass? 459 TCH. 3.4

456 Ae Healy xii 458 Ae Healy xiii 460 Lb H. 55 L. 14.0

160

Assemblage XL, N. 83-W Rowe Il, 11 Fig. X Reg. 461-479 Te frags Byzantine lamps

(11.9.2)

Fig. 340 Assemblage XLI, N. 83-W Rowe Il, 11, 17 Fig. X Pls. 5b, 13a, 14a. Reg. 482 Mb frieze 484 frag tear bottle glass. 490 ibid. Sousa 493 Mb with letters (AD 495 UwH.24L.4.4 497 Small clay plate 499 Uw Sousa 501 UwH.48D.23 — Sousa

(019.2)

Cat. 174

481 Flower pot?

Assemblage XLII, N. 83-AG Rowe If, 11, 24 Fig. X Reg. 503 Saucer

Reg. 483 frag spindle vase 485-489 frags coarse brown lamps 491492 ibid. 494 Bg H. 2.81. 7.8 496 TCH.80 ^ Sousa 498 Ae coffin ornament 500 ibid. 502 ibid. 152)

Reg.

Cat. (0.8.2)

Assemblage XLIII, N. 83-AK

Reg.

Cat.

504 Bg H. 1.4L. 8.2

Assemblage XLIV, N. 83-AT Rowe If, 11, 24, 30 Fig. X Reg. 505 Ae Healy i 507 Te Byzantine lamp frag Fig. 341 Assemblage XLV, N. 83-AO Rowe II, 11, 24 Fig. X Reg. 508 Te wig

(1.8.2)

Reg. 506 Tc frag

(L2)

Reg. 509 Tc Byzantine lamp

Assemblage XLVI, N. 83-AP Rowe II, 11, 24, 32 Fig.

Reg.

X

510 Coin Healy addendum. Assemblage XLVII, N. 83-AL Rowe II, 11 Fig. X PL 5b Reg. 512 Inscribed stone.

Cat. 174

Cat. 174 {Π|7.2)

Reg. 511 Lb Bowl

Cat. 212 9.2)

Cat.

Assemblage XLVIII, N. 83-AN Rowe Il, 11,24 Fig. X Reg. 514 Lb Amphora cremation Assemblage XLIX, N. 83-AV Rowe Il, 11, 17, 26, 30 Fig. X Reg. 515 Tc H. 128 W.87

Fig. 342 Assemblage L, N. 83-AW Rowe IL, 11, 17 Fig, X Pl. 14a

Reg.

797 {Π|8.2) Cat. 177 Cat. 152

Reg. 516 (Uw) dish

Cat.

Reg.

-

518 Bg Kylix frag Reg. (520 Uw Collared Bowl) 522 Uw H. 6.5.3.2 524 Uw H. 67 D. 43

Assemblage LII, N. 83-AN Rowe IL, 11, 17 Fig. X Pl. 13b Reg.

525a Rw H. 13.8

Assemblage LIII, N. 83-AV Rowe II, 11, 17 Fig. X Pl. 13c Reg. 526 15H. 5.4

Fig. 343 Assemblage LIV, N. 83-AZ Rowe II, 11, 17 Fig. X Pls. 12c, 13a Reg. 528 BgH.8.8D.103 Assemblage LV, N. 83-AV Rowe IL, 11, 17, 30 Fig. X Pls. 12c, 13a, 14a.

Reg. 530 Uw H. 48D. 123 532 Uw Jug’ Sousa 534 Bg H. 2.1 1.9.0 536 Te arm in relief 538 Ac Healy i

Assemblage LVI, N. 83-BB Rowe II, 12, 17 Fig. X Pl. 13a Reg. 540 Bg H. 23 L.9.0

Cat. (Π18.2)

513 frags lamp

Assemblage LI, N. 82-2 Rowe II, 9, 17 Fig. X Pl. 14a.

Reg.

-

517 (Bg) Kylix 519 Uw H. 4.5 Dia. 3.1

(1L15.2) Cat. 212 198 218

Reg. (521 Uw Collared Bow!) 523 (Bg) oinochoe

Cat. 212

(1.82)

Cat. 150

Reg. 525b Rw frag

Cat.

150

{Π|8.2) Cat. 258

Cat.

Reg.

527 handle bowl

{Π|8.2)

Cat. ΤΙ

Reg. 529 BgH.2.0L.9.8 ^ Sous

Cat. 100 (1.3.2)

Cat. 211 B 101 B 16

Reg. 531 RFH. 43 D. 48 533 (Lb) bowl. 535 Tc duck 537 Te frag bearded Zeus 539 Ac Healy ii

Sousa

Cat. 61 151 16 (1.82)

Cat. 104

798

Fig. 344 Assemblage LVII, N. 83-AV Rowe IT, 11, 30 Fig. X Reg. 541 Ae Healy iv

(11.8.2)

Reg.

Cat. 16

Cat.

542 Tc H. 4.0

L. 5.5 Sousa 166

(1182)

Assemblage LVIII, N. 82-4

Rowe II, 9, 17 Fig. X Pl. 13c Reg. 543 Ls frag H. 8.4 Assemblage LIX, N. 83-BK Rowe II, 12, 25 Fig. X-XII Pl. 6a, b Reg. 544 Mb frag statue 546 Sousa (548) bowl.

550 Lb Model vase 552 Lb Handle frag

554 Mb miscellaneous frags

556 Mb frag shoulder and drapery 558 frag aquamarine Assemblage LX, N. 83-BF Loc. 1 Rowe If, 12, 25 Fig. X-XI PL Ta

Reg. 559 Tc 191 berries’ 561 Ac Nail head 563 Το Figurine (Sousa)

Cat.

Cat. 258

(ILI02)

Cat, -

-

-

-

-

Reg. 567 Fefrags 569TeH.7.0

Sousa Sousa

571 unknown

Assemblage LXIII, N. 83-BF Loc. 4 Rowe II, 12,25 Fig. X-XI PL 7a

Reg. 572 Tc Figurine frags Sousa 574 Ae Healy v 516 Tc ‘27 berries 578 Lb Spindle vase 580 Uw Bowl 585 Lb Small vase 588 Lb Lid 594 Bg Skyphos

545 Mb frag statue.

547 549 551 553 555 557

frag boul - Persian? TcH.65 — Sousa RÉ Hydria neck. Mb frag with inscription Mb frags including drapery Uw frags amphorae εἰς.

597 frag. pottery. Inscription

(IL32)

Cat. 12 15 cf Add. III

Fig. 345 Assemblage LXI, N. 83-BF Loc. 2 Rowe Il, 12, 25 Fig. X-XIPl. 7a Reg. Cat. 565 TCH. 14.8 Sousa 158 Assemblage LXII, N. 83-BF Loc. 3 Rowe Il, 12, 25 Fig. X-XI Pl. 7a

Reg.

Cat. 20

Reg. 560 Fe Fastenings 562 Lb Lid 564 Tc Figurine.

156 (15.2)

Reg. 566 Tc H.

9.5

Sousa

Cat. 155 (113.2)

Cat. 21 -

Reg. 568TCH.5.1 Sousa 510 Fe Fastenings

Cat. 154 20

-

(032)

Cat. 170 16 12 212 64

Reg. 573 Fe 575 Ae wire

577 Lb (loom weight) 579 Lb Small vase 581-584 Lb Similar bowls 586-587 unknown 589-593 unknown 595-597 unknown

Cat. 21 12 229

799 Fig. 346 Assemblage LXIV, N.83-BI

Rowe If, 12, 14 Figs. X-XII Ps, 6a, 8a, δ Reg. 599 Bg H. 48D. 108 601 Bg H. 603 Uw Η. 605 Uw H. 607 Uw Η.

75 Ὁ. 8.2 2.7 D.7.6 2.0D. 9.0 3.2Ὁ. 10.2

Fig. 347 Assemblage LXIV, N. 85:81 Rowe II, 12, 14 Figs. X-XII Pls. 6a, 8a Reg. 609 Uw Η. 104 D.5.4 611 Uw. 8.0.5.2 613 Ὁν Η.3.11,9.4 615 PwH. 19.6. 11.9 Fig. 348 Assemblage LXIV, N. 83-BI Rowe II, 12, 14 Figs. X-XII Pls. 6a, 8b Reg. 617-622 unknown 624 Pb D.6.01.125

(IL102)

Reg. 600 Bg H. 60 D. 124 602 Uw H. 26 D. 8.0 604 Uw H. 26 D.7.8 606 Uw H. 26 D. 9.1 608 Pw H. 3.7 D. 11.0

(1.102)

Reg. 610 Uv H.94D. 5.8 612 Uv H.9.6D. 68 614 Uw H. 1.81.83 616 Uw H. 1 D. 7.1

Reg.

628 Sw H. 8.0D. 4.7

630 unknown (Olpe)

632 Uw H. 7.8 D. 4.5 634 Pw H.115D.42

Fig. 349 Assemblage LXV, N. 83-BG Rowe II, 12, 14-15 Figs. X-XII Pls. 8c, 9a, b Reg. 636 Uw H. 3.0.3.0 638 Uw H. 0D. 8.0 640 Uw H.3.7D. 9.1 642 Uw H. 1.8 Ὁ. 85 644 unknown 646 Uw H. 6.0 D. 7.2 648 Uw H. 3.11.72 650 Bg Η.201,8.6 652 Bg H. 2.4.9.0

Fig. 350 Assemblage LXV, N. 83-BG Rowe II, 12, 14-15 Figs. X-XII Pls. 8c, 9a Reg. 653 Bg H. 45D. 9.1 655 Bg H.33 D. 61 657 Bg H.37 D.7.0 659 Bg H.72D.47

Cat. 200 205 221 131 (1.102)

Reg. 63PbLS4D.55 625-627 unknown

Assemblage LXV, N. 83-BG Rowe II, 12, 14-15 Figs. X-XII Pls. 8c, 9a-c

Cat. 92 212 212 212 129

Cat. 25 (1.10.2)

Reg. 629 Uw H. 80D. 45 631 Uw H. 83 D.45 633 Pw H. 128 D.45 635 Uw H.82D.3.1

Cat. 138 202 126 216 (1.102)

Reg. 637 UwH.27D.84 639 UwH.3.0D. 84 641 Uw. 3.4.9.0 643 Uw H.20D.62 645 Fig. 351 647 Bg H. 19D. 4.8 649 Uw H.3.0L8.1 651 Bg Η.3.61.13.4

Cat. 212 212 212 192 99 192 225 109 (0.102)

Reg.

Cat.

654 Fig. 351 656 Bg H. 5.0 D. 6.8 658 Bg H. 11.0 D. 4.3 660 Bg H. 4.0 D.5.4

66 86 206

800

Fig. 351 Assemblage LIV, N. 83-BG Rowe II, 12, 14 Figs. X-XII Pls. 8c, 9a Reg. 645 Bg H.3.5 D.7.8 661 Bg H.42D. 69 662 BEH. 64.5.5 664 Bg Η. 167 D. 10.2 Fig. 352 Assemblage LXV, N. 83-BG Rowe II, 12, 15 Figs. X-XII Pl. 9c Reg. 666 Uw H. 126 D.79 668 Uw H. 224 D. 13.6 Prov. no. 24

Cat. 99 99 46 82 Cat. 199 178 177

Fig. 353 Assemblage LXV, N. 83-BG Rowe If, 12, 15 Figs. X-XII Pl. 9c Cat. Reg. 120 669 Pw H. 26.1 D. 17.8 671 Tripoli 672 unknown 673 unknown 674 unknown Assemblage LXVI, N. 8:-BH. Rowe If, 12, 14 Figs. X-XII Pls. 6a, 7c Cat. Reg. 177 12 677 UwH.48.0D.2 Fig. 354 Assemblage LXVI, N. 83-BH Rowe Il, 12, 26 Fig c, Figs. X-XII Pl. Frontispiece Reg. Cat. 680 RFH. 24.8 D. 173 48

Reg. 654 Bg H.3.8D.75 661A Bg H.45 D.72 663 BEH. 2.0.3.8 (665) Hydria, broken

(11102) Cat. 99 99 46 49

Reg. 667 unknown. Prov. no. 2

(11102) Cat. 178

Reg. 670 unknown 671A unknown 672B unknown 673C unknown 675-676 unknown

(1.102) Cat. -

Reg. 678-679 unknown

(1.102) Cat. (1.10.2)

(102) Cat. 175 85 85 (11.102)

Fig. 355 Assemblage LXVI, N. 83-BEL Rowe II, 12, 15-16 Figs. X-XII Pl. 10b,11a Cat. Reg. 681 Bg H. 17.6D. 13.0 80 5 683 Bg H. 114 D. 5.5 684 bis Fe L.9.9Th. 05 2

Reg. 682 Uv H. 167 D. 113 684 Bg H. 107 D. 63 685 Bg H. 105 D. 6.0

Fig. 356 Assemblage LXVI, N. 83-BH Rowe II, 12, 15-16 Figs. X-XII Pl. 10c Reg. 686 Bg H. 60Ὁ. 12.6 688 Bg Η. 60 Ὁ. 12.8

Reg. 687 SwH. GOD. 119 689 Bg H. 4.4.9.9

Cat. 140 64

Reg. 691 Bg H. 67 D. 13.6

(111.10.2) Cat. 139

Cat. 4 64

Fig. 357 Assemblage LXVI, N. 83-BH Rowe II, 12,15-16 Figs. X-XII Pls. 10¢,11a Reg. Cat. 690 unknown 692 Uw H.4.0D.55

206

693 Uw H. 5.0 D. 6.6 Sousa

206

801

694 Bg H. 5.4 D. 145 696 Bg H. 60 D. 10.8

68 99

Fig. 358 Assemblage LXVI, N. 83-BH. Rowe II, 12, 15-16 Figs. X-XII Pls. 10a, b, 11

Reg. 697

BgH.23L.92

699 Bg H.251.103

102

701

Uw H.3.11.8.4

225

H.15.7D.5.0

Fig. 359 Assemblage LXVI, N. 83-BH_ Rowe IL, 12, 15, 26 Figs. X-XII Pl. 10a, b Reg. 705 Uw H. 13.4. 8.0 707 Uw H. 7.0. 3.7 709 Sw H. 85 D.45 711 ὕν H.7.8D. 4.6 713 Uw H.7.4D. 4.4 715 Uw H. 65 D. 3.2 Assemblage LXVI, N. 83-BH Rowe II, 12, 15 Figs. X-XII Pl. 10a Reg. 717 Sw H.52D.42 719 unknown 721 unknown 723 Uw H.23 D. 86

102

126

735 Ae L.85 D. 66 Th. 0. 737, 738 unknown 740 Ag Healy xv 742-743 unknown

Cat. 198 202 138 201 202 216

Fig. 362 Assemblage LXVII, N. 83-BJ Rowe II, 12, 16-17 Figs. X-XII Pls. 11b, 12a

Cat. 102 225 225 126

Reg. 706 Uw H. 8.0 D. 4.0 708 Sw H. &0 D. 4.0 710 Uw H. 1 D.48 712 UwH.7.2D.3.9 714 Uw H. 8.2D. 54 716 Uw H. 84D. 40

Cat. 202 138 202 202 201 216 (01.102)

Cat. 133 192 Cat. 192 zu 212

u 5 -

Fig. 361 Assemblage LXVIT, N. 83:8} Rowe II, 12, 14, 16 Figs. X-XII Pls. 7b, 11b, 12a

Reg. 745 Uw H. 54.0 D. 26.5 749 Tripoli 752 Bg H. 64 D. 123

Reg. 698 Bg H. 241.94 700 Uw H. 3.3 L8.9 702 Uv H. 3.41.84 704 Pw H.12.7D.5.0

{π|.10.2)

Fig. 360 Assemblage LXVI, N. 83-BH Rowe II, 12, 15-16, 26, 32 Figs. X-XII Pls. 102, 11a

Reg. 725 Uw H. 2.5.8.1 727RdH.5.0D. 13.3 729-731 unknown 733 Uw H. 3.0. 87

69 (1.10.2)

Cat.

703 Pw

695 Bg H. 5.9 D. 12.0

Cat. 17 64

Reg.

Cat.

718 Sousa 720 Uw H. 3:0 D. 9.5 722UwH.25D.84 724 Uw H.2.6D.7.4

192 192 192 (1.102)

Reg. 726 unknown 728 Uw H. 40 D. 13.6 732 Uw H. 2.7 Ὁ. 8.5 734 unknown

736 Ae D. 108

739 Ag Healy xiv

741 Ag Healy xvi 744 Tc

12 (1.102)

Reg. 746-748 unknown

750 Uw H. 17. D. 12.1

Cat. 175 (1.10.2)

802 Reg. 751 Uw H. 17.5 D. 10.7 754 Bg H. 5.9 D. 12.7

Reg.

ixi mollusca 753 Bg H. 45 D.95 755 Bg Bolsal Tripoli Fig. 363 Assemblage LXVII, N. 85:8] Rowe II, 12, 16-17 Figs. X-XII PL. 12a Reg. 756 Bg H. 159 D. 10.0 758 Bg H. 15.0D. 105 760 Bg H. 95 D. 5.9 762 Bg Oinochoe Tripoli 764 Bg H. 29 D.rim 8.4

(11.102) Cat. 74 74 85 85 97

Fig. 364 Assemblage LXVII, N. 83:8} Rowe II, 12, 16-17, 22 Figs. X-XII Pls. 11b, 12a, 40a, b Cat. Reg. 98 766 Bg H. 2.8 D. rim 65

768 Bg H. 20D. 87 770 Bg H. 2.8 D. 43 TI2Uv H.5.6 L84 D. 5/7 774 Bg H. 23 L.105 776 Bg H.25 L.105

Fig. 365 Assemblage LXVII, N. 85:8} Rowe II, 12, 16 Figs. X-XII ΡΠ Reg. 777 779 781 783

unknown Uw H. 6.2 D. 10.0 Uw H. L7 D.7.6 Uw H. 3.2 D. &6

785 Uw . 6 D. 66 787 Us E. 85 D. 65

788A Uw H. 17.5 D. 10.4 Sousa.

Fig. 366 Assemblage LXVI, N. 85:8} Rowe II, 12, 16,32 Figs. X-XI PI. 11b, 12a Reg.

789 Pw H. 144 D. 68 792 Uw H. 74 D. 4.0

794 Uw HL 6:7 D.53

796 Uw H. 7.0 D. 47 798 Ae L.25.1 W. 2.8

800 Ag Healy xvi

Cat. 179 64

Reg.

757 Bg Oinochoe untraced 759 Bg H. 145 D.69 761 Bg H. 10.5 D. 5.2 763 Bg H. 11.3 D. 7.1

765 Bg H. 3.0. 85

Cat. 5 85 85 ΠΗ 69 (11.102)

Reg. 767 Bg H. 26D. 64 769 Uw H. 113 D. 5.1 771 Uw Lamp Tripoli 773 Bg H.22L.94 775 Bg H. 2.1.10.

Cat. 98 216 225 102 102 1.102)

Reg. 778 Uw H. 4.3 D. 8&0 780 unknown

782 Uw H. 3.0.80 784 Uw H. 786 Uw H. 788 Uw H. 791Uw H.

69 D. 13.9 8.9 D. 6.6 13.0 D. 5.5 Sousa 125 D. 84

Cat. 206 212 211 198 194 197 {Π|10.2)

Reg. 790 Pw H. D.5 D. 4.8 793 Uv H.75 D.48 795 unknown. 797 unknown. 799 unknown, 801 Ag Healy xvii

Cat. 126 202 5

802-805 unknown

Fig. 367 Assemblage LXVIII, N. 83-BM Rowe II, 12, 25, 30 Fig. X PL6b Reg. 806 Lb Amphora handle 808 Ae Healy vi 810 unknown

(3.2)

Reg. 807 Sousa 809 Ae Healy vii 811 Mb Statue frag

Cat. 16

805 812 Mb Statue frag 816 Sousa

245 -

Assemblage LXIX, N. 81-B Lower Enclosure Rowe II, 12, 18, Fig. X Pl. 14b.

Reg. 818 Ls H. 33.0 D. 20.0 820 Sousa

Assemblage LXX, N. 83-BK Rowe II, 12, 25 Fig. XIV Pl. 6a Reg. 821 Mb part of 8112

Cat. 249 -

813-815 unknown 817 unknown (ILI7:2) Reg. 819 Ls H. 24.0 D. 22.5

Cat.

250

(0.102)

Cat, 245

The last object to be registered in the 1956 season was 822.

Reg. 822 unknown

Cat.

804 EXCAVATION LIST

Assemblage Sarcophagus Group N. 83LXXX N.83-BP N.S-BO — LXXI (N. 83-BS-BP) LXXIX ΙΧΧΥΠῚ N.S-BS N.SM-BT — LXXVI Area ΙΧΧΠἧ N.SBN ΓΧΧΠ N.83-BU Tomb N. 82 LXXIV LXXVH LXXXI XC,XCIID Tomb N. 81-4

Figure Reg.No.M 905A/B 375 823-825 368 375 892-904 373374 — 872891 855.868 371372 826-840 36 841-843 370

Figure

Assemblage Lower Enclosure N. 81-B XCVI — XCIX Sarcophagi LXXXII N.81-C ΧΟΙ — N.81-K XCIV N.81.K CHI N. 811 ΟΝ N.8LR CremaüionGroupXCVIID

390391 1040-1042, 1045 1045-1065 392393 924-935 378 993.994 38 996-1000 584 1083-1091 396 1092. 1092} 397 392 1043-1044

370 844-852 868A-871 Enclosure N. 81-BB 372 CVI 906-915 376 381,384 — 972,995 CXVH Sarcophagi (N. 81-2) cx N.81-AA CXIT Courtyard LXXXII 377 916-923 LXXXIV 378379 9360943 Enclosure N. 81-KK Grave (d),e Grave f LXXXV, 379 944.945, VI 947-952 CXV Grave g LXXXVI, 379, 946,966-971 CXVI IX 381 CXVIU — Hall LXXXVIII 380 9534-965 CXX — Enclosure N. 82-23 Sarcophagi CXV 400401 1109-1115 N.8LII IX CXIX 11221125 N.8L-RR 402 CXI CXXI 1129 N. 81-AC 402 CXII N.8LAD Cxxm Enclosure N. 82-1

Sarcophagus LXXV N.825 Tomb N. 81-0 XCVI — CI Upper Enclosure N. 81-B. ΧΟΙ XCV — CVE Sarcophagi ΝΒ ΟΥ̓ ς (SLD αι N.8L-L

NSEM

— CV

Reg. No.M

398.400 —— 10982-1104 406 1155-1158 401 402

1116-1121 1126-1128

403 1130-1136 406 1147-1154 406407 1159-1171 409411 — 11771-1185 404 408 412418 420

11372, b-1146 1172-1176 1189-1254 1257-1261

419 2142) 425 426 426

1205-1256 1255-1305 1316-1321 1322-1326 1327-1329

Enclosure N. 81-AB

370

853-854

1030-1039 389 396 — 1081a-1082e

CXXE CXXIV CXXVI Sarcophagi CXXVIL N.81-TT CXXVII N. 81-AI Enclosure N. 81-AN CXXV CXXIX

38133 — 975992 385988 1001-1029, 1332 400 11061108 Exchange object: 400 1105 Rowe II, 1066-1073 394. cf Beschi 1074-1080c 395

397 — 109-1097

424 426

1306-1315 1330-1334

1335 20 PI.29b (1972), 308 Fig. 110 no.151

805

Fig. 368 Assemblage LXXI, N. 83-BQ Rowe II, 12,25 Fig. XIV Pl. 22a Reg.

(1.112) Cat.

Reg.

823 Pw H. 14.6 D. 10.6 825 ΒΕΗ. 3.3 D.5.2

124 47

824 BH. 34

Cat. D.5.3

Fig. 369 Assemblage LXXII, N. 83-BN.

(1.11.2)

Rowe II, 12, 25 Fig. XIV Reg. 826 Rw frags 828 Uw frag 830LsD. 13.6

832 Uw D. 033 834 836 838 840

Si Sg frag, millefiori Uw H. 80D. 5.6 UwH.53D.3.2 Uw H. 8.9200

Fig. 370 Assemblage LXXIII, N. 83-BU Rowe II, 12,25 Fig. XIVPl. 22a Reg. 841 Uw H. 2.6D.93 843 SwD.5.7 Assemblage LXXIV, N. 82 Rowe II, 9, 22, 24 Fig. XIV Pls. 41a, b, 42b Reg. 844 Tc frag 845e Sg 1 fruit 846 Sg H. 045 D. 0.85 848 Mb frag 850 Bf frag 851 Tc frag

Assemblage LXXV, N. 82:5 Rowe II, 5, 32 Fig. XIV Reg. 853 Ae Coin

Cat. 150 225 247 218

Reg.

Cat.

827 TcH. 2.5 D. 3.0

829 Sp Ring stone 831 Uw H. L5 L.6.0 833 Uw D. 027

168

221

28 200 219

835 ΒΕΗ. 49 D. 7.8 837 Tc H. 251.45 839 Mb Th. 3.6 -- 4.5

44 166 240

Cat. 212 24

867 Uw frag.

{Π|11.2) Cat.

Reg.

198

Cat, 172 12 37 244

Reg. 845d Te 1 fruit 845f Sg 1 bead 847 RE frag 849 Mb frag

1.122) Cat. 12 35 49 245

43 174

850 bis Bg 852 Si Fe frag

Cat, 16 Car. 175 213 198 6 -

25c, 36a, 39b

Cat. 198 198

842

37 219

Uw D. 5.8

Fig. 371 Assemblage LXXVI, N. 83-BT Rowe II, 12, 19, 21-22 Fig. XIV Pls. 22a, 25c, 36a, 39b

Reg. 855 Uw H. 165 D. 134 857 Uw H.3 1 Dim 75 859 Uv D. 88 861 Ac frags 863 Bg Vase frag Fig. 372 Assemblage LXXVI, N. 83-BT Rowe II, 12, 19, 21-22 Fig. XIV Pls. 22a, Reg. 865 Uw Η. 82.6.0

47

Reg. 854 Si Ae Coin

84 21

(1.152) Cat. 16 (1.11.2)

Reg. 856 Uw H. 144 D. 62 858 Uw H. 26 D. 60 860 Bg Skyphos 862 Bg H. 23 L.10.8 864 Uw H.25D.65 Reg. 866 Uw D. 5.5

868 Uw D. 45

Cat. 194 214 92 102 214 L112) Cat. 198

204

806 Assemblage LXXVII, N. 82 Rowe II, 9, 32, Fig. XIV Pls. 41a, b

Reg. 868A Mb 870 Coin Healy addendum

(11122)

Cat. 244 16

Fig. 373 Assemblage LXXVIII, N. 83-BS Rowe II, 12, 21-22 Fig. XIV Pls. 22a, 33b, 36a, 39b, c.

Reg. 872 UwH. 260 D. 14.0 874 Uw 876 Uw H. 127 D.5.6 878 Uw H.5.1 D. 5.1

Cat. 178 175 195 206

Fig. 374 Assemblage LXXVIII, N. 83:85 Rowe II, 12, 21-22 Fig. XIV Pls. 22a, 33c, 38c, 39¢

Reg. 879 Bg D. 13.2 881 UwD.35

Cat. 91 216

Cat. 172

Reg.

869 Te frag 871 unknown

{π.11.2)

Reg. 873 Uw H. 16.0 D. 11.3 875 Bg H. 20 L.10.2 877 UwH.74D.75

61.11.2) Reg.

880 Bg H. 140D. 65 882 Uv H.23 D.92

887 Uw H. 3.01.80

225

884 Uw H. 28 D.7.5 886 Uw D.5.7 888 Uw H. 3.2L.8.1

889 UwH.7.2 890A Uw H. 9.3

201 202

891 UwH.

883 UwH.2.9D.7.8 885 Uw Η. 2.9 Ὁ. 8.2

192 192

890 Uw H. 85

8.3

Cat. 198 202 225 174 211 216 180

Note: 898-904 could belong to N. 83-BO (III.11.2).

Assemblage LXXX, N. 83-BP Rowe II, 12, 14 Pl. 22a

Reg. 905A/Ba Si Sg Fig. 376 Assemblage LXXXI, N. 82 Rowe II, 12, 32 Fig. XIV Pls. 41b, c. Reg. 906 Bg frag 908 Bg D. base 6.4 910 Si Ac 912-915 Ls frags

Cat. 85 192 192 220 225 198 202 1.112)

Fig. 375 Assemblage LXXIX, (N. 83-BS - BP) Rowe Il, 12, 14 Pl. 22a

Reg. 892 UwH.7.9D.69 893A Uw H. 73 895 Uw H. 3.1 L88 897 Το frag 899 Uw H. 64 901 Uw frag 903 Uw frag

Cat. 175 106 220

Reg.

893 Uw H.7.0 894 Uw H. 48.6.0 896 Uw H. 2.1 L55 898 Uw H.2.9D. 82 900 Uw H. 86 D. 355 902 BgH.12L113 904 Uw frag

Cat. 201 207 223 212 216 101 178 quia

Cat. 30

Reg. 905A/Bb Si Sg

Cat. 70 96 16 260

Reg. 907 Bg 909 Te frag 911 RE frag

Cat. 64 m 5

Fig. 377 Assemblage LXXXII, N. 81-b (Courtyard of Tomb N. 81-A)

(1.17.2)

Rowe II, 7, 20-21 Fig. XIV Pls. 31a, 34c Reg. 916 Tc frag

Cat. 165

Reg. 917 Te frag

Cat. 35 {Π1.12.2)

Cat. 152

807 918 Te frag 920 Te frag 922 Ls frag

Fig. 378 Assemblage LXXXIII, N. 81-C. Rowe II, 7, 20 Fig. XIV PL 31a

Reg. 924 Uw Lid H. 24 D. 7.1 925, 934 Uw frags 927 Bg H.20L.9.9 929 Te frag 931 Tc frag 933 Uw frag

159 153 264

Cat. 189 198 102 165 162 175

Fig. 379 Assemblage LXXXIV, N. 81-A, Grave (d), e Rowe II, 7-8, 23 Fig. X Reg. Cat, Assemblage LXXXV, N. 81-A, Grave f Rowe II, 8, 23 Fig. X

Reg. 944, 949b Bg frags 945 bis Sg bead

921 Te frag 923 Uw

H. 6.8D. 35.0

182

Reg. 924 Uw Bowl H. 2 D. 7.5 926 unknown

928 930 932 935

Tc frag unknown Uw frags Bg D.5.0

Reg.

946 Tc ‘Berries’

Assemblage LXXXVII, N. 81-A Grave f. Rowe II, 7,23 Fig. XIV

Reg. 947 Sg frags 9492 Bg frags 950 Te frag 952 Pw H. 3.9

Cat. 189 170 189 86 (1.17.2)

Reg. 936e Te Three berries 938a Bg frag 939 unknown 941 Mb frag

Cat. 12 102 (11.17.2)

Reg.

Cat. (1.17.2)

Cat. 85 35

Reg. 945 Te Four ‘berries’

Assemblage LXXXVI, N. 81-A, Grave g Rowe II, 7, 23 Fig. XIV

264 153 185 1212)

Assemblage LXXXIV, N. 81-A, Grave (d), e Rowe II, 7-8, 23 Fig. X Reg. Cat. 936d Si Tc Four berries 12 957 Sw frag nl 938b Bg frag part of 949a. 73 940 Te frag m

942, 943 Uw frags

919 Ls

Cat. 12 (0.17.2)

Cat.

Reg.

Cat.

12

(1.17.2)

Cat. 30 B 163 129

Fig. 380 Assemblage LXXXVIII, N. 81-A Hall Rowe II, 8, 21, 23 Fig. X PL 33b. Reg. Cat. 953d Tc 5 fruit 12 953f Og Coral 267

Reg. 948 Bg H.20L64 9490 Bg frags 951 Uw frag

Cat. 102 85 225 (1.17.2)

Reg. 953e Tc 3 fruit 954 Oss D. 2.4 Th. 02

Cat. 12 42

808 955 957 959 961 963 965

Pw H.17.8D. 11.4 Uw D. 4.6 Bg Η.251.9.2 Uw H. 2.7 Uw D. 3.9 Uw H. 5.1 D. 144

19 203 102 212 218 211

Fig. 381 Assemblage LXXXIX, N. 81-A, Grave g Rowe II, 8, 23 Fig. X

Reg.

966 Bg frag 968 Bg frag 970 Bg D. base 4.4

Assemblage XC, N. 82 Rowe II, 12, 32 Fig. XIV Pls. 41b, c. Reg. 972 Coin Healy addendum

Cat.

99 81 85

956 Uw H. 8.0D. 4.0

958 Bg H.20L87 960 Bg frag 962 Uw frag 964 Uw frag

(1.172)

Reg. 967 Uw frag 969 Uw frag 971 Bg frag

Cat. 16

Reg.

Cat. 91 86 64 99 52

Reg. 974 Si unknown 976 Si Bg H. 6.2D. 5.3

Reg. 977a Bg frag part of 973 977ς Bg frag 979 Pw frag 981 Uw frag 983 Pb L.15.0 W.2.7 Th. 0.25 985 Bg H. 2.1 987 Bg frag, part of 973 989 Uw H. 4.4.3.0 991 UwD.3.9

Fig. 384 Assemblage XCII, N. 81-K Rowe II, 8, 24 Fig XIV Pl. 22b, 23a Reg. 993 Uw frag

Cat. 49 99 132 218 23 102 49 234 218

Cat. 86 (111202)

Reg.

9760 Bg frag 976d Bg frag 9768 Bg frag 976h Bg part of 976i 976 Bg frag joins 1106

Fig. 383 Assemblage XCI, N. 81-B Upper Enclosure Rowe II, 7,23-24 Fig. XIV Pl. 22¢

Cat. (11202)

Fig. 382 Assemblage XCI, N. 81-B Upper Enclosure. Reg. 976a Bg frag 976c Bg frag 976: Bg frag 976g Bg frags 976iBg part of 976h

Cat. 206 183 9 {Π112.2)

Assemblage XCI, N. 81-B Upper Enclosure Rowe If, 7,23 Fig. XIVPl. 22c Reg. Cat. 973, 977a, 1098gRE frags 49 975 Bg frags [ Rowe II, 7,23 Fig. XIV Pl. 22c

203 102 72 177 218

Cat. 95 87 64 52 52 (111202)

Reg. 9770 Bg frag 978 Uw frag 980 Uw frag

982 Uw frag 984 RÉH. 10.0 D. 6.0 986 Bg H. 9.0 D. 5.5 988 Uw H. 5.3 D. 3.1 9% Uw D. 3.2 992 Uw D. 5.3

Cat. 99 218 218 225 58 85 234 219 220 (111212)

Cat. 180

Reg. 994 Ae mirror frag

Cat. 9

809

Assemblage XCIII, Tomb N. 82 Hall Rowe IL, 9, 24 Fig. XIV Pl. 41c Reg. 995 Te frag Assemblage XCIV, N. 81-K Rowe II, 8, 24 Fig. XIV Pl. 22b, 23a

Reg. 996 Uw frag 998 Sw H. 1.1.2.8 1000 Tripoli Oinochoe Fig. 385 Assemblage XCV, N. 81-B Upper Rowe II, 7, 20 Fig. XIV Pls. 22c, 31a Reg. 1001 Tc Figurine head 1003 Ls frag 1004 bis Pw frags 1006 Uw Η.2.11.5.7 1008 Uw H. 3.4 D. 7.7

(11.122) Cat. 172

Cat. 225 149 85 Enclosure Cat. 152 264 15 222 212

Reg. 997 Uw frag

m212) Cat. 225

999 Si unknown

Reg. 1002 1004 1005 1007

Tc Ls Bg Ls

Figurine head frag frag frag

B

(11202) Cat. 152 264 101 249

Note: 1004 bis-1006 could belong to N. 81-W (III.202).

Fig. 386 Assemblage XCV, N. 81:8 Upper Enclosure Rowe If, 7, 32 Fig. XIV Pl. 22c

Reg. 1009 1011 1013 1015 1017 1019 1021 1023

Uw H. 8.9 D.5.7 Uw Uw Η. 62 0.3.7 Uw Pw Uw Ae fragTh. 0.2 Ae coin

Cat. 132 219 219 218 132 219 10 16

Fig. 387 Assemblage XCV, N. 81-B Upper Enclosure Rowe Il, 7 Fig. XIV Pl. 22c

Reg. 1025 Tc W.25.032.0Th. 25 1027 Ls L.25.3 W.15.2Th. 8.0 Fig. 388 Assemblage XCV, N. 81:8 Upper Rowe II, 7,20 Fig. XIV Pl. 30a

Reg.

1029, 1332 Ls

Fig. 389 Assemblage XCVI, N. 81-0 Rowe II, 8, 21-22 Fig. XIV Pls. 33c, 38¢

Reg. 1030 Uw H.3.7 L&6 1032 Uw H. 3.41.82 1034 Uw 1036 Uw H. 87 D.47 1038 Uw H. 9.1D. 4.6

Cat. 235 253 Enclosure

(1120.2)

Reg. 1010 Uw H. 66.37

Cat. 219

1012 Uw H. 5.8 D. 4.0 1014 Uw 1016 Uw 1018 Uw 1020 Uw

218 218 218 234 215

1022 Si Coin

1024 Ag coin

16

16 (1.20.2)

Reg.

Cat.

1026 Ls H. 26.0 D.top 9.0 D. base 18.0 1028 Ls H. 23.0 W.7.9-10.5 Th. 2.8

251 255

Cat.

Reg.

260

(1029 bis) Ls joins 1029

(1.202) Cat. 260

(11182) Cat. 225 225 192 138 202

Reg.

Cat.

1031 Uw frag

225

1035 Uw H. 3.0 D. 8.0 1037 Uw Η. 8.5 D. 5.7

212 132

1033 Uw Η. 25 D. 8.1 1039 Uw frag.

192

202

810

Fig. 390 Assemblage XCVII N. 81-B Lower Enclosure Rowe II, 7, 20 Fig. XIV Pls. 27a, 28a-¢ Reg. 1040, 1045 Ls Total H. 90.0 W. 56.0 Th. 28.0

(1212)

Fig. 391 Assemblage XCVII N. 81-B Lower Enclosure

(IIL.21.2)

Rowe II, 7 Unpublished Reg. 1041 Ls 1042+ Ls

Cat. 253 253

Cat. 257

Reg.

Fig. 392 Assemblage XCVIII N. 81-B Lower Enclosure Cremation Group (IIL21.2) Rowe II, 20 Fig. XIV Pls. 25b, 26a

Reg.

Cat.

1043 Uw H. 49.0 D. 31.0 1044 Uw H. 13.6 D. 8.1

180 216

Assemblage XCIX N. 81-B Lower Enclosure Rowe II, 7, 20, 22, 26, 32 Fig. XIV Pl. 38¢ Reg. 1045 Ls joins 1040 1047 Ae Coin 1049 Mb frag

Cat. 257 16

Fig. 394 Assemblage C (N. 811) Rowe II, 8, 20 Fig. XIV Reg. 1066 Uw H.2.1D.68

Cat. 192

1068 Uw H. 3.1 D. 9.5 1070 Sw Η. 8.9 1072 Uw H. 6.6

212 138 201

Reg. 1046 Ls 1048 Pw H. 124 D. 40

Cat. 249 126 (121.2)

Reg. 1051 Uw H. 6.8D, 3.7 1053 Uw H. 63 D. 4.2

1055 Ux H. 44

1057 SwH.7.2D. 11.1 1059 Si Ae L.6.0 W.0.3 1061 Uw H. 3.8 D. 7.7 1063 Uw H. 87 D. 5.5 1065 Ls

Cat. 217 218 207 144 12 212 202 249 {Π|20.2)

Reg. 1067 Uv H.29D. 85 1069 Uv H. 23.6.4 1071 Uw H. 6.4 1073 UwH.4.0D.22

Cat. 192 223 201 234 (11.20.2)

Reg. 1074 Uw H. 3.6 D. 2.3 1076 Uw D. 24

Cat. 234 215

1078 Uw fragD. 15.6 1079d Te 15 fruit

178 12

1080a Si Pb stem

Cat. 178

241

Note: 1054-1057 could belong to N. 81-Q (IIL.21.2).

1080c Ae

Reg. (1043 bis) Uw Amphora.

(11212)

Fig. 393 Assemblage XCIX N. 81-B Lower Enclosure Rowe Il, 7, 20, 22, Fig. XIV Pl. 38¢ Reg. Cat. 1050 Uw H. 7.4 D. 4.6 218 1052 Uw H. 51D. 3.1 219 1054 Uv H.23L53 223 1056 Uw H. 23 D. 8.0 212 1058 Sw frag 136 1060 unknown 1062 Uw H. 5.5 228 1064 Tc frag 15

Fig. 395 Assemblage CI, N. 811, Rowe II, 8, 22 Fig. XIV PL38c, 39c

Cat.

1042 unknown

12 13

Reg. 1075 UwD.3.0 1077 Uw H. 83 1079c Si Tc 18 fruit. 1079 Tc 8 fruit 1080b Ae leaf stem

Cat. 234 220 12 12 12

Fig. 396 Assemblage CII, N. 81-0 Rowe II, 8 Fig. XIV

Reg. 1081aSi AeL5.8 1081f Ae frag 1082d Te 9 fruit

Assemblage CIII N. 81-] Rowe II, 8, 21 Fig. XIV Pls. 33b, 33c Reg. 1083 Bg Lamp Tripoli 1085 Uw D. 6.1 1087 Uw Η. 2.3 D. 5.6 1089 Rf frag

1091 Lb H. 3.9

Fig. 397 Assemblage CIV, N. SLR Rowe II, 8, 24 Fig. XIV Reg. 1092 Ae frags 1092b, c Ae frags 10925, h Ae frags of 1092 1092}-n Assemblage CV, N. 81-M Rowe II, 8, 24 Fig XIV

Reg. 1093 Ae needle 1094A Bg H. 2.4 1096 Uw H. 20 D. 4.0

Fig. 398 Assemblage CVI, N. 81-BB Reg. Rowe II, 7,21 Fig. XIV Pl. 32b

811 (HLIS2)

Cat. B 12 2

Reg. 1081b-d Ae leaf stems 1082a Si Το 4 buds 1082e Te 6 fruit

Cat. 12 12 12 (11212)

Cat. 102 197 214 58

130

Reg. 1084 1086 1088 1090

Bg Uw Uw Bg

H. 2.0 frags frag frag.

Cat. 102 225 198 99 (1125.2)

Cat. 9 6 15

Reg. 1092a Ag Ring 1092d.£ Ae frags 10923 Fe frag

Cat. 4 13 21: (1.20.2)

Cat. 13 102 192

Reg. 1094 Pw frag 1095 Bg frag 1097 Bg frag

Cat. 119 102 99 (1.22.2)

Cat.

Cat.

Fig. 399 Assemblage CVI, N. 81-BB Rowe II, 7 Fig. XIV Reg. 1098b RF frags part of 1177.2a, b, 1177.4a, b, 1307A,B

01222)

400 Assemblage CVI, N. 81-BB Rowe Il, 7 Unpublished Fig. XIV

(1.22.2)

10982 Rf frags join 117.1, 1334

Reg. 1098c Bg 1098e Bg frag 1098g Rf frag part of 973 1098i RF rim frag 1100 Uw H. 3.1 D.7.9 1102 Mb frag

52

Cat. 81 64 49 48 212 241

Cat. 52

Reg. 1098d Bg 1098fBg part of 11773 1098h Bg frag. 1099 unknown 1101 Uw frag D. 4.1 1103-1104 unknown

Cat. 6 51 99 196

812

Assemblage CVII, N. 81-W Rowe II, 8, 24 Fig. XIV Pl. 19b Reg. 1105 Mb frag

(1120.2)

Cat. 245

Cat.

Assemblage CVIII, N. 81-B Upper Enclosure Rowe If, 7 Fig. XIV Pl. 19a, b Reg. Cat. 1106 Bg joins 976j 52 1108 unknown -

(1.20.2)

Assemblage CIX, N. 82:23 Rowe II, 921-22 Fig. XIV Pls. Reg. 1110 Bg H. 2.01.89 1113 Bg frag.

Cat. 57

Reg. 1107 Rf frag.

(1.152) 33b, 38c, 42a

Fig. 401 Assemblage CIX, N. 82:23 Rowe II, 921.22 Fig. XIV Pls. 33b, 38c, 42a

Reg. 1109 Ls frag 1114 Bg H. 3.9 D. 6.0

Assemblage CX, (N. 81-2) Rowe II, 8, 24 Fig. XIV Pl. 21a Reg. 1116 Ba frag 1118 Uw H.24D.7.5 1120 Uw

Cat. 100 101 Cat. 261 99 Cat. 81 212 210

Reg. 1112 Uw frag 1115 Uw H. 85.3.8

Cat. 225 216

Reg. 1117 1119 1121

BgD.5.0 Uw H. 3.2.7.6 Uw H.22D. 83

Cat. 86 212 212 (11152)

Cat.

1122 Ls stele 1124 Ls base

253 254

Fig. 403 Assemblage CXIV, N. SI-KK Rowe II, 8, 20, 24, 32 Fig. XIV P130b Reg. 1130 Mb frag

Cat. 225

(1.22.2)

Fig. 402 Assemblage CXI, N. 82-23 Rowe II, 9, 24 PLC Reg.

Assemblage CXIII, N. 82-23 Rowe I, 9 Fig. X Reg. 1129 Mb frag.

H.1L75

{Π|.13.2)

Note: 1116-1121 could belong to N. 81-Z (IIL.22.2).

Assemblage CXII, N. 81-AA Rowe Il, 8, 24 Fig. XIV Pl. 21a Reg. 1126 Uw Ὁ. 65 Th. 4.5 1128 Uw Ἡ. 3.1 Ὁ. 83

Reg. 1111 Uv

Reg. 1123 Ls base 1125 Si Ls frag

Cat. 254 253 (11222)

Cat. 229 212

Reg.

1127 Uv H. 43 D.88

Cat. 212 (1.13.2)

Cat. 244 (1125.2)

Cat. 245

Reg. 1131 Bg H. 13.6 D. 65

Cat. 78

813 1132 Bg D.9.5 59 1134 Bg H. 2.0 L.11.2 96 1136 unknown Note: 1131-1135 could belong to N. 81-CC (II1.22.2).

Fig. 404 Assemblage CV, N. 8LIKTIL242) Rowe Il, 8, 21 Fig. XIV Pl. 33c Reg. Cat. 1137a, b Ae frags 6 1138 unknown 1140 Bg H. L7 L.8.0 106 1142 Uw frag au 1144, 1145 Fig. 405

Fig. 405 Assemblage CV, N. 81-11 Rowe II, 8, 21 Fig. XIV Pl33c Reg. 1144 BgH. 55 D. 15.0 Fig. 406 Assemblage CXVI, N. 81-KK Rowe II, 8,20,32 Fig. XIV Pls. 18b, 30b, 31b

Reg. 1147 Te frags 1149 Bg H. 2.3 1151 Coin Ae 1153 Ls frag

Assemblage CXVII, N. 81-BB Rowe IL, 8 Fig. XIV Pls. 18a, b, 32b Reg. 1155 Uw H. 26D. 7. 1157Rw frag

Assemblage CXVIII, N. 81-KK Rowe II, 8, 21 Fig. XIV Pls. 18b, 37d, e. Reg. 1159 RE Fig. 407 Assemblage CXVIII, N. 81-KK Rowe II, 8, 21 Fig. XIV Pls. 18b, 312 Reg. 1160 Ls frag 1162 Ls frag 1164 Uw H. 5.3 D. 5.8. 1166, 1172 bis Bf frags 1168 Uw frags 1170 Uw H.25 D. 6.0

1133 Uw H.32D.82 1135 Bg frag

212 73

Reg. 1137c Fe frag 1139 unknown 1141 ὕν H. 54 D. 115 1143 Pw H. 30D. 54 1146 Ae frag

Cat. 20 au 131 6 (1.24.2)

Cat. 87

Reg. 1145 Bg H. 5.25 D. 16.75

Cat. 87 (125.2)

Cat. 172 102 16 262

Reg. 1148 Ae Coin 1150 Uw H. 25 D. 8.6

1152 Sg H.05L20

Cat. 16 212 37

1154 unknown

(1122.2) Cat. 233 150

Reg. 1156 UwH. 35.9.8

Cat. 212

1158 unknown

(1.23.2) Cat. 60 (1123.2) Cat. 258 263 219 45 197 233

Fig. 408 Assemblage CXIX, N. 8I-RR. Rowe II, 8, 20-21 Fig. XIV Pls. 26c, 33c, 34b. Reg. Cat. 1172a-c Ag Three earrings’ 4

Reg. L161 Te frag 1163 unknown 1165 Uw frag 1167 Uw frags 1169 Uw H.3.5D.9.0 1171 Uw H.23 0.70

Cat. 154 218 215 212 212 (1125.2)

Reg. 1173 Pw H. 18.8

Cat. 124

814

1175 Bg H. 50D. 65

1174 Pw Model jug 1176 Bg H. 181,82

(1125.2)

Fig. 409 Assemblage CXX, N. 81-KK Rowe II, 8 Fig. XIV Pl. 18b. Reg. 1177.1 Rf joins 1098a 1177 3a-i, 1098F Rf frags 1178, 1179 unknown

Reg. 1177 2a, b RE part of 1098b 1177 4a, b Rf part of 1098b

Cat. 52 52 (11232)

Fig. 410 Assemblage CXX, N. 81-KK

Rowe Il, 8 Fig. XIV Reg. 11804, b Bg frags 1182 Rd Th. 65.3.0 1184 Tc frag 1186 Ls drapery 1188 Pw frags

90

70,79

Fig. 411 Assemblage CXX, N. 81-KK Rowe II, 8, 20 Fig. XIV PI31b Reg.

1185 Ls joins 1333

Reg. 1181 1183 1185 1187

Tc Tc Ls Ae

frag Th. 40 Fig. 411 frags

Cat. m 236 6 (11.23.2)

Reg.

Cat.

Fig. 412 Assemblage CXXI, N. 81-AC Rowe If, 8, 19 Figs. XIII, XIV P1252, b Reg. 1189a-h Fe frags Th. 0.2 11891 Ae frag 1190a, b Ag L.pin 4.0 1191a, b Ag Th. 0.1 1192a, b Ag D. 1.5 Th. 0.25 1193 Ag L.1.8 untraced 1194 AgL.2.2 1195a, b, d Ag untraced 1195c Ag L.0.9 Th. 0.1 1196a, b Ag untraced 1196c Ag 1. 6 D. loop 0.6 Th. 0.15 Amber L.1 0 W. 0.9 1196d Ag untraced 1197 Ag D. loop 0.6 Carnelian 1.1.5 D. 1.0 1198 Ag D. loop0.5 Th. 0.1 IvoryH. 2.0 1199 Ag D. loop 0.7 Th. 0.1 AmberH. 1.0 L.1.8 1200 Ag Rock CrystalH. 07 L.13 W. 1.0 1201 Ag Sg H. 1.0W. L5 L.L8 1202 Ag H. 14 L.1.8 D. loop 0.7 AmberL.1.1 D. 08 1203 Ag D. loop 0.4 Th. 0.2 IvoryH. 1.7 1204 Ag Haematite L.3.8 untraced

(1123.2)

Fig. 413 Assemblage CXXI, N. 81-AC Rowe II, 8, 18-19, 21 Fig. XIV Pls. 25a, 36b Reg. 1205 Fe (L5.9 W. 4.6 Th. 0.1)

(1125.2)

(1206) Ae frag

Reg. 1205A,B Assemblage CXXII Fig. 419

Cat.

Assemblage CXXI, N. 81-AC Rowe II, 8, 18-19, 21 Fig. XIV Pls. 24c, 36b Reg. Cat. 1207 Pw H. 20.5D. 15.2 120 1208a Fig. 415 1208c Fig. 417 1210 Uw Η. 56 D. 12.4 211 Fig. 414 Assemblage CXXI, N. 81-AC Rowe II, 8, 18-19, 21 Fig. XIV Pls. 24c, 36b, 38b Reg. Cat. 1208 Pw H. 19.6 D. 14.6 120 1212 UwH.2.8D.7.9 213 1214 Uv H. 25 D. 68 233 1216 Uw H. 14 Ὁ. 6.9. 233 1218 UwH. 14.8D.7.2 193 1220 Uw H. 93 D.7.8 198 Fig. 415 Assemblage CXXI, N. 81-AC Rowe II, 8, 18, 21 Fig. XIV Pls. 24b, c, 35a

Reg. 1208a Pw unregistered frags 1223 Bg H. 4.8 D. 10.0 1226 Bg H.3.0D. 6.7

Cat. 120 64 92 Cat.

1227 BFH. 3.7 D.5.0 1230 Bg H. 1.5 L.7.2

47 101

RÉH. 122D. 80 Uv H. 84 D. 5.9 Bg H. 10.8 D. 56 RFH. 80D. 5.0 Bg H. 4.6 D.3.8

1253 Bg H. 54 D. 64

128 (1125.2)

Reg. 1211 Uw H. 49D. 117 1213 Uw H. 31 D.7.9 1215 Uw H. 15 D. 63 1217 Sw H. 19D. 5.7 1219 Uw H. 10.1.84 1221 Uw H. 62 D. &0

Reg. 1222 Bg H. 5.6 D. 105 1225 Bg H. 32D. 6.1 1228 Bg H.55 D. 7.0

121

Cat. 120 102 147 157 157 164

Reg. 1224 Bg H. 5.0 D. 9.8 Tripoli 1229 Pw H.25D.41 1231 Bg H. L8L.82

Cat. 211 212 233 135 198 190 Cat. 64 87 64

Cat. 58 230 86 61 12 99

Cat. 64 118 101 (1125.2)

Reg. 1232 Bg H. L8.7.8 1234 Bg H. 20 L5 1236 Uw H. 18.7.8 1238 Tc H. 105 1240 Tc H. 10.8 1242 Tc frag,

Fig.418 Assemblage CXXI, N. 81-AC Rowe If, 8, 19-22 Fig. XIV Pls. 24c, 32a, 35b, 36d, 37b, 38b.

Reg. 1243 1245 1247 1249 1251

Cat.

(1.23.2)

Fig. 417 Assemblage CXXI, N. 81-AC Rowe II, 8, 8b, 18, 21-22 Fig. XIV Pls. 24c, 33a, 39d

Reg. 1208c Pw unregistered frags 1233 Bg H. L9L.90 1235 Bg H. L5 L.60 1237 Tc H. 103 1239 Tc H. 105 1241 Tc frag,

Reg. 1208 Fig. 414 1208b Fig. 416 1209 Pw H. 44 D. 115

(1.23.2)

Fig. 416 Assemblage CXXI, N. 81-AC Rowe II, 8,1821 Fig. XIV Pls. 24b-c, 35a Reg,

1208b Pw unregistered frags

815 (1125.2)

(1125.2)

Reg. 1244 1246 1248 1250

Cat. 101 113 Add. IV 157 157 151

RÉH. 10.7 D. 7.0 Pw H. 7.6D. 6.7 Bg H. 10.8D. 5.5 RÉH. 65 D. 4.4

1252 BgH.7.0D.77

1254 Bg H. 5.8D. 6.2

Cat. 58

816

Fig. 419 Assemblage CXII, N. 81-AB Rowe II, 8,21 Fig. XIV Pls. 18c, d, 37c Reg. 1205A RE frag 1255 Fig, 421

(11242)

Cat. &

Fig. 420 Assemblage CXXIIL, N. 8I-AD. Rowe II, 8, 20-21 Fig. XIV Pls. 26b, 32a, 34a, 36c

Reg. Pw H. 17.6Ὁ. 33 1257 1259 BEH.35D.56 1261 Ag Dia. 1.44

Fig. 421 Assemblage CXXIV, N. 81-AB Rowe II, 8, 21 Fig. XIVPl. 37c

Reg. 1255 Bg frag 1257-1261 Fig. 420 1263 RE Bg frags 1265 Ls frag 1267 Bg H. 2.0 1268b Fe frag 1270 Lb frag

Fig. 422 Assemblage CXXIV, N. 81-AB Rowe II, 8, 21, 26 Fig. XIV Pl. 35c

Cat. 121

4

Cat. 83 55 258 102 22 152

11.232)

Reg. 1258 Bg H.22L.82 1260 Bg H. 55 D. 66

Cat.

101 7

Reg. 1256 Cr Bg frags 1262 Sg H. 0.65 L.1.7 1264 Ae frag 1266 ΤΟ 1.4.6 1268a Pb frag 1269 Pb frag

Cat. 78 31 6 168 25 27 (1242)

Cat.

Uw H. 3.3D. 8.3 1271 Pw H. 15.0D. 6.4 1273 1275 unknown 1277 Bg H. 2.2 L.10.2

212 125 101

1281 Bg H. 1.5 1283 Uw H. 32 D.95

101 212

86

Fig. 423 Assemblage CXXIV, N. 81-AB Rowe II, 8, 21, 22, 26 Fig. XIV Pls. 35c, 37a, 39a

Reg. 1285 Pw H. 63 D.7.8 1287 Pw H.22D.35 1288 Mb frag 1290 Pw H.7.0D.7.6 1292 RFH.7.4D.48 1294 Bg frags 1296 Ls H. 9.0 W. 60 Th. 2.1 1298 Uw H. 49D. 125 1300 Rf frags 1302 Mb L.16.8W. 124

Cat. 54

(11242)

Reg.

1279 Tripoli Oinochoe

Reg. 1205B Rf joins 1308 1256 Fig. 421

Cat. 123 n7 241 122 61 112 255 211 59 239

Note: 1280-1287 could belong to N. 81-GG (111.23.2). Note: 1291-1295 could belong to N. 81-HH (Π1.23.2).

Reg. 1272 Bg H. 75 D.95 1274 Sw Tripoli 1276 Bg H.23 1.95 1278 Bg H. 55 D. 45 1280 Bg H. 2.1 1282 Uw H. 3:7 D.95 1284 Uw H. 5.6 D. &1

Cat. 89 133 102 99 102 212 212 (01242)

Reg. 1286 PwH. 45 D.55 1287A Rf frag. 1289 Si Strigil 1291 Bg Tripoli 1295 Bg H.6.5D.4.0 1295 Tripoli Lamp 1297 unknown 1299 Uw H. 52D. 120 1301 unknown 1303-1305 Ls frags

Cat. 117 54 6 87 86

Fig. 424 Assemblage CXXV, N. 81-AN Rowe II, 9, 20-21, 26 Fig. XIV Pls. 31c, 37¢

Reg. 1306 Tc frag H. 8.5 W. 4.8 1308R joins 1205B 1310B H. 93g D. 6.0 131 Bg Η.130}.6 2 3 134$wH.15

817 (1.16.2)

Cat, 152 54 85 85 146

Reg. 1307A,B part of 10982, b 1309 unknown 1311 Bg Oinochoe Tripoli 1313 Bg Kalpis Tripoli 1315 BgHL. 3.1 L3.5

Cat. 52 198 72 107

Note: 1309-1315 could belong to N. 81-88 (IIL.23.2).

Fig. 425 Assemblage CXXVI, N. 8-AB. Rowe II, 8, 26 Fig. XIV Reg. 1316 Bg H. 2.0 L.10.8 1318 UwH.35D.78 1320 RF frags

Fig.426 Assemblage CXXVII, N. 81-TT Rowe II, 8, 24 Fig. XIV Pl. 21b

Reg. 1322 Uw H. 14.0D. 80 1324 Uv H.35 D. 79 1326 Te frag.

Assemblage CXXVIII, N. 81-AT Rowe IL, 9, 24 Fig. XIV Pl. 18c Reg. 1327 Si Ae unknown 1329 RE frag

Assemblage CXXIX, N. 81-AN Rowe I, 9, 20 Fig. XIV P129

Reg. 1330 Mb frag 1332 Ls joins 1029 1334 Rf frag joins 10982.

(11242) Cat. 101 212 56

Reg. 1317 BgH. 2.0L.11.6 1319 Uw. 2.9D.7.4 1321 Uw H. 42

Cat. 101 212 192

1123.2) Cat. 196 212 170

Reg. 1323 Bg frag, 1325 Ls frags

Cat. 5 252 (11242)

Cat. 5

Reg. 1528 Lb Large bow! frags

Cat. (11.16.2)

Cat. 241 260 52

Reg. 1331 Ls frag 1333 Ls joins 1185

Last registered object for 1957 season was 1334, with one exchange object 1335 (Rowe II, 20 Pl. 295).

Cat. 252 262

INDEX

Adapted cubiculum - formae IV.1.10, 359 Figs. 237-238 Acolic capital IV.1.1, VI4.1, VI5.2, 336337, 472, 475 Figs. 208, 285-286 Pilasters/pillars 11.4.3, IN.1.1, VI3.1,3-4, VILL2, 109-110, 335-336, 470-471, 504 Figs. 76, 208, 284, 288 Tombs TV.1.0-1, 334-336 Figs. 67, 72-73, 78, 208-211,288 Ain Hofra IV.1.1, 336 Alizeytin VI2.2, 468 Alexandria VI.1.0, 461 Abusir Cemetery V1.1.2, 466 Fig. 274 Anfoushy bypogeur: IV.1.7,9-10, VI.12, 356, 358, 361, 467 Fig. 277 Gabbari Cemetery IN.1.7, VL1.2, 356, 467 Fig. 277 Hadra Cemetery IV.1.6, V.2.1, VL12, 350, 448, 466 Fig. 275 Kóm el Shukafa Catacomb 1V.179, VL12, 354-355, 358, A67 Figs. 276-277 Mustafa Pasha Kamel bypogeum 1.1.9, VLL2, 359, 466 Figs. 275-276 Plinthine Cemetery IN.1.7, 1.1.2, 355, 467 Fig. 274 Sciatbi Cemetery IV.1.8, V.2.1, VLL2, 357, 404, 466. Fig. 274 Wardian Cemetery V1.1.2,467 Alipheira VI.4.4, 473 Fig. 286 Amaseia IV.1.4, VI.2.6, 345, 469 Fig. 281 Amathus IV.1.7, 1.3.1, 355, 470 Fig. 282 Aniconic bust/half-figure V.42, V5.13, VIS, VLGO, 414, 417, 463, 475 Figs. 253, 255 Antechamber cubiculum IV.1.9, 358 Figs. 235-236 Antiphellos VI.1.1-2, 463, 466 Fig. 279 Apollonia ‘Museum Necropolis’ VI.1.1, VI3.2, 465, 471 Fig. 271 Apollo Sanctuary 1.2.1, I. 14, 1V.13,7, V5.1, 24, 37, 100, 343, 354, 4 Arcade IV.1.0, 335 Figs. 236-238 Arcaded hypogeum and triclinium IV.1.8, 356 Figs. 234255

Archaic Doric tombs IV.1.0-1, 334-337 Figs. 67-68, 70-71, ΤΊ, 208-209, 287 Archaic Tonic tombs IV.1.0, 334, Figs. 212-213 Block capital TV.1.1, 336-337 Fig. 210 Capital IV.1.1-2, 337-339 Figs. 212, 214 Arcosolium 12.1, 13.2, 11.164, IV.03, 27, 41, 270, 333 Figs. 30, 237 Barrel vaulted 13.2, 11.2.3, 112.144, IV.177,9-10, 42, 104, 264-266, 355-356, 359-361, Figs. 28, 60, 191, 233, 236-238 Conch 1.23, 1Π.1.3, IV.1.10, 1.2.3, 104, 247, 360, 469 Figs. 293-294 Sculpted conch ΠῚ.1.3, 247 Figs. 173, 299 Square-beaded 11.4.3, 110 Figs. 74, 79 Ada 1V.145, V.L13-4, V34, V4.1, V.S, VLL1, VI224, VI32, VLA, 347, 349, 398, 401-402, 410, 413, 428, 463, 468-469, 471, 473 Fig. 266 Bab Sousa IL 3, 102 Bacchielli, Lidiano 14.0, 112.1, ILLI, W101, 1V.0.1, 46, 58, 103, 246, 258, 331 Fig. 293 Barce necropolis VI.1.0-1, 461-462 Tomb ‘di Menecrate’, VIL1.1, 463 Fig. 265 Beechey, Frederick and Henry 1.2.0, 12.1, 122, 13.0, 13.2, V.13, V.4.0, V.73, 24-28, 32, 3637, 39, 401, 411, 426 Figs. 1-2, 4, 6, 260 Beida gravestone V.7.3, 426 Fig. 260 Berenike V1.1.0, 461 Mafluga VI.1.1, 465 Figs. 269-270 SelmaniV.8.1, VL1.1, 428, 464 Fig. 269 Sidi Hussein VI.1.1, 464 Fig. 269 Beschi, Luigi 1.4.0, 11.12.13, IV.00, V.1.1, V3.1, V.42, V5.0-1, 1V.1247, 46, 140-141, 327, 398-399, 408, 416-418, Figs. 157, 240, 253 Block-cut cremation casket V.4.5, 415-416 Fig. 252 - see Sarcophagus - Limestone - Casket Bourville, Jean Vattier de 12.2, 13.0, 13.1, 13.2, 1V.18, 28, 31, 37-39, 42, 356 British Museum 12.1, 123, 132, 133, IV.0.0, IV.1.1, 25, 34, 39, 45,327, 338 Burial chamber IV.1.1-2, 336, 338, 340-342 Figs. 208, 217

820

Burial practices VILI2.0-11, 524-528 Figs. 298-300 Burial precincts and plots 1 8.4, IV.13, V.1.0,4, V22, V23, VA2, V.6.1, 128, 345, 498, 402, 404-407, 414,421 Figs. 163, 246 Burton Brown, Captain T. 122, 124, 14.0, 142, 143, V.4.02, V5.03, VLLO, 32, 35, 46, 51.56, 411, 414, 416, 420, 461 Figs. 37, 39, 45 Buttle, Derek 14.0, 142, ILLO, 11.13, IL10.1, IL1L.L, V3.4, 46, 55, 100, 102, 136, 138, 410 Campbell, John 1.2.1, 26 Canosa VI.5.1, 474 Fig. 286 Cassels, John 1.2.4, 125, 13.2, 1.4.0, 1.9.1, IL1O.L, ALi, 1.12.1, 1113.1, IV.0.1, IV.L67, 3536, 42,46, 129, 138, 140, 328-330, 351-353 Fig. 17 Caunus VI.22, 468 Fig. 279. Cervelli, Agostino 1.2.0, 12.1, 122, 13.2, Π4.1, 118.1, V.4.0, V.8.1, 23, 27, 33, 44, 109, 126, 411, 428 Fig. 290 Chamoux IV.0.0, V.1.0, V.5.0, 328, 397, 416 Chamber loculus - see Loculus Chania Kydonia Necropolis V1.3.4, 471 Fig. 284 Charmyleion V.1.5, VI3.2, 402, 471 Fig. 283 Cherstich, Luca 122, IV.1.1,6-7,9-10, V.15, V2.2, V3.2, V3.4, V.8.1,4, 33, 336, 350, 353, 359, 361, 402, 404, 408-411, 428, 431 Choban Tepeh V3.4, VLLL, VL24, 410, 463, 469 Fig. 280 ας 514713.1,39 Fig. 256 5149, 5149b 12.2, 30 5151122, 123, 11.8.1, 32, 35, 126 5152122, 13.2, 33, 43 5153 13.1, 13.2, 39, 41 5154 122,132, 35, 44 51555156122,30 5157A-C 122, 33 5159.5160122, 30 5162-5163 1.2.2, 30, 33 5164 13.1,39 5166-5167 1.2.2, 32-33 5169-5170 1.2.2, 30 5178122,31 9136 12.2, 30 Cinalli, Angela IV.1.10, 361 Cineraria V.8.1, 427-430 Figs. 261-262 Circular built tombs IL113-4, 1133-4, IV.0.1, V.22, V3.0, 139, 143-144, 329-330, 404, 407 Figs. 145, 158, 249-250 Crepidoma burial plot V3.3, 409 Figs. 249-250 Crepidoma with roofed tumulus V.3.4, 409-410 Fig. 250

Orthostat-built burial plots V3.1, 408 Figs 247-248 Socle and podium built burial plots V3.2, 409-409 Fig. 249 D-shaped (Cassels); Horseshoe (Tomlinson) V.3.0, 407 Cistern IIL124, IIL63, V.84, 246-248, 253, 431 Figs. 172, 230 Cist grave IL11.1, IL122, VIL15.03, 138, 140-141, 530.531 Figs. 148-149, 153, 301 Colonnette memorials V.7.2, 425 Fig. 259 Columbarium IV.1.0,6-7, VI.23, 335, 350, 355-356, 469 Figs. 234, 280 ‘Corinthian Tomb’ IV.13, VI3.2, 343, 470 Figs. 219, 283 Cova V.23, V.8.1, 1.3.2, 406, 429, 470 Fig, 283 Cremation IIL11.1-4, IV.L6, V8.1, VIL13.03, 263-264, 351, 428-430, 528-529 Figs. 188, 269, 300 Cremation receptacle 1133, [Π|13.4, IV.15, V8.1,4, VILIS, 107, 267, 349, 429-430, 535 Figs. 61, 193, 227, 262, 305 Crimisa VI5.1, 474 Fig. 286 Crowe, Vice-Consul Frederick 13.0, IV.1.6, VLL, 37, 350, 464 Fig, 269 Cubiculum 13.2, 142, 12.1, 1143, 1Π13, UL12.1-4, IIL16.4, IV.03, IV.1.0, IV.14, IV.17, 40-41, 43-44, 56, 103, 111, 247, 264-266, 270, 333, 335, 346, 355 Figs. 27-28, 173, 191, 225, 233, 235-238 De Cou, Herbert 14.1, 11.2.1, 113.1, 48, 103, 105 Defined area 1133, IL6.1, 11133, IV.1.03, IV.157, V.23, VI3.2, 107, 120, 250, 334, 342-345, 353-354, 405-407, 470 Figs. 175, 178, 219-220, 232, 246, 283 Delaporte 1.2.0, 23-24 Della Cella, Paolo 1.2.0, 24 Dennis, George 13.0, 13.2, IL3.4, 37, 45, 108 Didyma VL33-4, 471 Fig.284 Dikili Tas VI2.6, 470 Fig. 281 Di Valerio, Eugenio IV.1.2, IV.17, IV.1.10, 339, 355-356, 361 Dokuz Sokak IV.1.3,7, V5, V.8.1, VI3.2, 343, 353, 402, 430, 471 Fig. 283 Dixon, David IIL1.0, 242 Doric Columns/capitals 1143, 1V.1.0, VI3.1, VILLL, 109-111, 334, 470, 503 Figs. 74, 225, 287, 282 Entablature 122, 123, 1133, 1.73, IV.1.03, 1V.158, 31, 34, 107, 125, 333-334, 342344, 348-349, 351, 353-354, 356-357 Figs. 8, 220, 224, 226-227, 231, 289

821

Facade 122, 1194, 1V12, IV.145, VLLO, VL2.6, VI5.1, 29-30, 32, 136, 342, 346-349, 461, 470 Figs. 8, 223, 225-226, 234, 281, 286 Frieze 12.1, IV.1.0, 26, 334 Figs. 4-5, 225 "Doryphoros' stele V.7.3, 425 Fig. 260 El Mawy land 1.2.3, 13.2, 14.1, 11.7.1, IL8.1, IV.123,6, V.1.2, V3.2, V.4.0, 34, 40, 44, 50, 122, 126, 341, 343, 345, 350, 400, 408, 411 Figs. 14, 16, 29, 109, 118, 210, 228, 238, 249 Eleusis V5.3, VI.6.0, 420, 475 Epidaurus VI.4.4, 474 Fig. 286 Euesperides V.8.1, VL10, ΥἹ 4.2, 428, 461, 473 Fig. 269 Fabbricotti, Emanuela 1.4.0, 46 Fagade chamber and subterranean chamber tomb 1V.12, 338-342 Figs. 214-217 Facade loculus - see Loculus False fagaded tombs IV.0.1, IV.1.0, 7, 330, 334, 351.353 Figs. 231-232 Forma 13.2, 142, 1.23, 11.43, IIL13, 1V.1.0,7,10, 42, 56, 104, 110-111, 247, 353, 355, 361 Figs. 29, 233, 236-238, 299 Frigerio, Claudio 1.4.0, IV.1.7, 46, 353-354 Funeral bust 12.1, 14.1, 1112.2, 111.132, IV.10, 25, 49-50, 265-266, 335 Fig. 402 Galleried loculus - see Loculus Gast Jebr V.4.1,5, VLL, 413, 416, 465 Fig. 272 Gherdek-Kaya VI.2.4, 469 Fig. 280 Goodchild, Richard G. 125, 14.1, 14.2, 143, 1.22.1, V.5.0, 36, 47, 277, 416 Granger 12.0, 23, Gravestones V.7.3, 425-426 Figs. 260-261 Hadrianopolis VL1.1, 464 Fig. 268 Halbherr 11.2.1, IIL.1.1, 103, 245 Half-figures 1.4.2, 119.1, 1.12.1, 51, 54, 129, 140 Figs. 40-41, 157 Aniconic 14.1, 115.2, TILI24, 111.132, 16.2, 111.202, IIL2114, IV.00, V42, V5.13, VILI, 50, 116, 266, 270, 274-277, 328, 414, 417, 419, 462 Figs. 220, 253-255, 265, 372, 388, 390, 401 Jeonic 140, 111.104, II123.1.2, IV.0.0, IV.134,1, 05.13, VL, 46, 262-263, 278-279, 328, 343, 346, 352355, 417-418, 420, 475 Figs. 40-41, 254-255 Halicarnassus V1.2.2, 469 Fig. 279 Hambar Kaya V1.2.5, 469 Fig. 281 Hamilton, James 12.1, 122, 132, 13.1, IL41, V33, V.45, V.8.1, 24, 29, 105, 109, 409, 416, 428 Figs. 249, 261 Herm 12.1, 1.9.4, V5.1, 24, 135-136, 418Figs. 137, 260

Hogarth, D.G. 14.1, 1.2.1, IL4.1, ILLI, 49, 103, 109, 245 Holliday, T. III.1.0-1, 281-282, 286

Hoplite shield 1133, IV.13, VL22, VL43, 106, 343, 468, 473 Figs. 64, 220, 279, 283, 285 Hypogeum 122, 132, IV.1.0, 29-31, 41, 335 Figs. 8, 11,234 Hyslop, C.G.C. IV.0.0-1, 327-328

Inscribed memorials V.7.2, 425 Fig. 259 Inscribed tablets V.7.3, 426-427 Fig. 261 Inscriptions Cut 13.2, 11.43, IV.1.6, VIL8.1-3, 41-44, 111, 351, 517-518

CIG 5175 V 2.3, 427 Fig. 261

Panel IL3.1,3, IV.1.8, V.7.3, 105, 107, 357, 427

Figs. 66, 235, 261

SEG XVI 869a-b VIL8.1, 517

Painted CIG 5149 VIL4.3, 512 Fig. 173 CIG 5154 Aristoteles 1.2.0, 12.2, 23, 33 CIG 9136 Demetria 11.1.0, 111.13, IV.0.0, 99, 247,327 Figs. 172-173

Tonic Column 114.3, 1V.1.6, VIL13, 110, 351, 504 Figs. 68-70, 288 Entablature 122, 11.43, IV.103, IV.15-6, VIL23, 31, 110, 334, 343-344, 349350, 505 Figs. 9, 23, 82, 96, 221, 225, 228-229, 250, 289 Facade 1.3.2, IV.1.0,3, 40-41, 334, 343 Figs. 29, 220221 Frieze IV 1.0, 334 Figs. 220-221 Pilaster capital TV.1.2, 339 Fig. 214 Iskilip VL2.5, 469 Fig. 281 Island sarcophagi V.4.3, 414-415 Fig. 252 - scc Sarcophagus - Limestone Tsodomic-built loculus tombs see Loculus Jewish Revolt IV.18, V.82, VLLO, 356397, 430, 462 Johns ΟΝ. 1.2.4, 143, 35,57 Jowett, Frank 14.2, 51-56 Kamilari VI3.4, 472 Kenissich 12.2, 14.1, 142, IILL1, IV.17, 32, 50, 56, 245,355 Figs. 10, 45, 233 Kerameikos V.7.1,3, VL4.1, 424-425, 472 Figs. 285, 260 Keramos VI.2.2, 468 Fig. 279 Kilkis V4.3, 473 Fig. 285 Kline 122, 1143, 1153, 1V.L139, VI224, VIA4, VIL5.02, 33, 111, 117, 335-338, 344, 358-359, 468-469, 474, 513-514 Figs. 11, 76, 100, 208, 210, 212, 215, 222, 236, 280, 295

822

Klinenmonument IV.1.8-9, 356, 359 Figs. 11, 236 Knossos VI3.4, 471 Fig. 284 Kuklia IV.1.7, VL3.1, 355, 470 Fig, 282 Langada VI4J, 473 Fig. 285 Lemaire 12.0, V.8.1, VL , 23, 428, 464 Fig, 269 Liverpool University Π.1.0, 99 Loculus 12.1, 12.2, 123, 132, 14.1, 13.1, 1133, 1163, 117.1-4, IT.134, IILA3-4, VLL2, V122, VI324, VLA4, 26, 3135, 40-44, 49, 55, 105-106, 121-126, 246-248, 250.251, 466467, 468-471, 473 Figs. 4, 6, 8-11, 23, 27-30, 32, 34, 36, 39, 45, 104, 116, 170, 174, 176, 219-225, 228, 232, 259, 277, 279, 283-284, 286, 298 Chamber loculus 123, 132, 113.1, 111234, TV.1.0,2, 41-45, 105, 248-249, 333-334, 339 Facade loculus 124, 123, 132, ΠΠ3.2.4, 1V.L024, 3132, 3435, 43-44, 249-250, 333-334, 339, 342-345 Figs. 215, 219-220,223 Galleried loculus 12.2, 123, 13.2, IV.1.05, 33, 43-44, 334, 349-352 Figs. 229-230 Isodomic built loculus V.1.5, 402 Fig, 243 Long chamber loculus 12.2, 1V.1.0,6, V.23, 33, 334, 349-350, 406 Figs. 228-230 Porticoed chamber loculus IV.1.0, IV.1.7, 334, 352 Fig. 231 Square chamber loculus IV.1.4, 345-347, Figs. 223.225 Unporticoed chamber loculus 1V.1.0, 1.1.7, 334-335, 353-354 Fig, 232 Wide chamber loculus 1.2.2, 123, 13.2, IV.135, 33, 43-44, 342, 344, 347-348, Figs. 219, 225.228 Loculus sarcophagus 14.1, 17.2.4, IILI83-4, V.63, VIL3.11, 49, 124-125, 272-273, 422, 508 Figs. 112, 117, 198, 225, 257, 304 Long chamber loculus - see Loculus Maioletti, Benedetto 12.3, 14.0, 11.1.2, 1.4.1, 11.6.1, 1V.04, IV.13, V.L1, V.40, V.42, 34, 46, 101, 109, 120, 328-329, 342, 399, 411, 414 Figs. 243, 258, 295 Mastaba V.1.2, 399-400 Figs. 241-242 Mausoleum and monuments V.2.1, 403-404 Fig. 245 Memorials V.7.2, 424-425 Fig. 259 Mersa Matruh Bates’ Tomb VI.1.2, VI3.1, 466, 470 Fig. 273 Marina el Alamein V.12, VL1.2, 400, 466 Fig. 273 Minutoli’s Tomb V1.1.2, 463 Fig. 273 Messa V.114, V.2.1, V3.4, VLLL, 399, 401, 403, 410, 462 Fig. 265

Mghernes V.13, V3.4, VLL.1, 401, 410, 465 Fig. am Min 142, VL10, 51, 56, 461 Fig. 45 Model funerary stelai V.8.3, 430 Figs. 263, 387, 423 Model naiskos V.8.3, 430 Fig. 263 Monuments - Gravestones V.7.1, 423-424 Figs. 258-259 Mudir/Mudir's house 14.1, 1.2.1, IV.1.10, V.43, 47, 49, 103, 360, 414 Figs. 57, 252 Murals 1.2.1, 122, 13.1, 132, 112.1, 3, 143, 1V.00, IV.L8, 1.1.2, VI23, VIL4.1-2, 26-27, 29.31, 38, 41-42, 44, 103-104, 327, 357-358, 467, 469, 508-512 Figs. 8, 293-294 Nacoleia VI.2.2,4, 468 Fig. 280 Naiskos IV.1.02, V.13, V.42, V5.2, V.63, 334, 340341, 400, 414, 418-419, 422-423 Figs. 95, 100, 215, 253-254, 257 Nea Paphos IV.1.6, VI3.1, 350, 470 Fig. 282 Negri, Pietro 12. , 13.0, 13.1, 30, 37,39 Niche Aniconic bust/balffigure IV.1.0, IV.12, V5.1,

334, 341, 417 Figs. 215, 253-254, 265 Casket V8.1, 429 Fig. 261 Cinerarium 1.33, 1.7.3, IV.03, V.8.1, 107, 125, 333, 428 Figs. 116, 237, 261, 300 Cremation 13.2, IV.1.0, V.8.1, 44, 335, 427-430 Figs. 261-262,300 Funeral bust 12.1, 132, 133, 1143, 1.63, 1V.03, IV.1.024, V5.0, V.8.1, VIL7 4-6, 25, 41, 43-45, 107, 110-111, 121, 333, 335, 342, 416, 428, 515-516 Figs. 28, 217, 296 Hamilton see Casket loomic balffigure IV.1.1-2, V5.1, VII 1, 339, 341, 417-418, 515 Figs. 254, 296 Ossuary 11.43, 1V.03, IV.1.9-10, V.82, 111, 333, 335, 341, 359, 361, 430 Figs. 236, 262 Panel V.13, VILT.2,4-5, 427, 515-516 Figs. 101, 261, 296 Rectangular/square 13.2, 11.4.3, IV.12, VAS, ‘VIL7.4-5, VIL77, 40, 110-111, 339, 416, 515-516 Figs. 214, 296 Round-beaded 11.43, 11.43, IV.1.6, VIL7.45,7, 111, 250, 350, 515-516 Figs. 228, 296 Stele YV.13-4, V7.2, 344, 347, 424-425 Fig, 259 Vessel Π.3.3.4, 1.7.1-4, V.8.1, 106-108, 123-125, 427-428 Figs. 64, 116, 261, 300 Norton, Richard 1.2.2, 123, 13.2, 14.0, 14.1, 112.1, 114.1, 15.1, 1.7.1, 118.1, IV.13, V.4.03, V5.0, V8.1, 31, 34, 40-42, 45, 47-50, 103, 109, 113, 122, 126, 343, 411, 415, 416, 429 Figs. 34-35, 57, 252 Ossuary IV.1.6, 350

823

Pacho, Jean-Raimond 1.2.0, 1.2.2, 123, 13.1, 13.2, 140, 14.1, 24, 2633, 35, 38-44, 46, 48-50 Figs. 3.1 Painted camera IV.1.0,4, 335, 346 Fig. 235 Paleokastro VI3.1, 470 Fig. 282 Pedestal stele monuments V7.1, VIL93, 424, 519.520 Figs. 53-54, 56, 259 Pediment IV.1.1,3-5, 335, 342, 345, 348 Figs. 25, 208, 215, 219, 223, 225, 253 Peribolos 1V.02, V.22, VL4.1, 332, 405, 472 Fig. 285 Porcher, Edwin Augustus 13.1, 13.2, IIL.1.1, 38-45, 245 Fig. 171 Portico chamber tomb IV.1.1, 335338 Figs. 208-212 Porticoed and sepulchre IV.L7, 352-356 Figs. 31.234 Porticoed chamber loculus - see Loculus Qizqapan VI.4.1,472 Ras el Hilal IV.0.1, V.1.1,4, V.2.1, VI.1.1, 329, 399, 401, 403, 465 Fig. 272 Revetment Isodomic built V.2.3, 405 Fig. 246 Orthostat-built TV.1.0,3,5-6, 334, 344, 350 Figs. 27, 178, 222, 229 Reynolds Joyce II.1.1, V.7.3, 246, 427 Rhamnous VI4.1, 472 Fig. 285 Rock-cut grave IIL.1.0, VIL14.0, 241-242, 529-530 Fig. 301 N. 83-AG IIL15.24 269 Fig. 193 Upper Group N. 83:20 T1L1.3, 246 Fig. 179 N. 83-A to F ΠΙ5.1,251 Fig. 179 N. 83-L ILL, 246 Fig. 166 N. 83-0 IIL125, 246-247 Fig. 301 N. 83-T IIL13, 246 Fig. 301 Lower Group N. 823 IILS.1-4, 255-256 Fig. 180 N. 83-Al, AJ, AK, AM, AR, AO, AZ IIL8.1-4, 255-256 Fig. 180 N. 83:80, BD IIL8.1-4, 255-256 Fig. 181 Rowe, Alan 12.1, 14.0, 142, 143, V.40, 24, 46, 50-52, 56-59, 411 Fig. 165 Rowe, Olga IILLO, 281 Said Faraj 1.2.2, 33 Fig. 227 Salt, Henry 12.1, 12.2, V7.1, 24, 28, 424 Samos IV.1.2, 1.2.2, VI3.3, 339, 468, 471 Fig. 284 Sarcophagus configurations V.4.0, 411 Marble Battle 13.1, IV.1.8, 38, 356 Figs. 11, 234 Block V 4.1, 413 Fig. 251 Casket V.4.1, 413 Fig. 251

Garland 12.1, 12.2, IV.18, 25, 31, 356 Figs. 11,234 Strigillated 1.2.2, 13.1, IV.1.8, 29, 31, 40, 356 Figs. 8, 11, 234 Fragments 14.1, IV.1.8, 50, 356 Limestone 124, 13.2, 14.1, 142, 123, 1.33, 1.72, 24, 27, 43, 4853, 103-104, 107, 123-125 Figs. 4, 57, 109, 114, 236, 251 Amazonomachia W.1.9, 359 Fig. 236 Block 132, 114.1, 1.6.2, 117.24, IL10.14, 11132, IV.13, V4.1, 01.2.2, VII.16.04, 43, 109, 123-125, 136-138, 143-144, 344, 413, 468, 531.532 Figs. 29, 68-70, 79, 104, 109, 113, 116, 142-144, 163, 222, 251, 279, 304 Casket V.4.1, 413 Fig. 305 BlockN. 83-1 V.4.5, 416, Figs. 252, 304 N. 83-V IIL7,3, 254 Fig. 179 Museum V.45, 460 Fig. 252 Rock-cut N. LAC, AD, RR ΠΠ23.2.4, V.5.3, 279-280, 420 Figs. 203, 255 N. 83-BR, BT V.45, 416 Fig. 252 Chamber IN.1.2, 341 Fig. 217 Garland IN.1.10, 359 Fig. 237 IslandV 43, 414-415 Fig. 252 Onthostat-built V.4.4, 415 Fig. 252 Rock-cut V4.2, VIL1T.0-6, 413-414, 532-534 Figs. 165, 251, 304-305 N.81-AA, CC, DD, FF, X, Z 1112223, V.63, 277-278, 423 Fig. 203 N.8LAH, AI IIL2424, V.62, 281, 422 Figs. 206, 257. N. 81-AG, AJ, XX IIL24.4, 281 Fig. 206 N.81-C, J, K, N, P, Q 1112125, V42, V.53, 276-277, 414, 419 Figs. 202, 255 N.SLL, M, W IIL173, 1112023, 271, 274-275 Fig, 202 N. 81:00 I11.25.2-3, 279-280 Fig. 203 N.8L-HH, II, 11.2424, V.63, 281, 423 Figs. 206, 257 N.81JJ, MM, QQ IIL163, IV.13, V.62, 270, 344, 422 Figs. 195, 257, 304 N. 81-88, TT, 1.23.23, 319-320 Figs. 203, 206 N. 81-UU V5.2, V.623,422 Figs. 254, 257 N. 81-VV IILISA, 272 Fig. 200 N. 82-5, 6 11.15.23, 268-269 Fig. 193 N. 828, 9, 10, 11 IIL142, 267-268 Fig. 193 N. 82-12 IL 13.3, 266-267 Fig. 193 N. 82-13, 14 111.133, 266-267 Fig. 193 N. 82-15 IL. 13.3, 266-267 Figs. 192-193 N. 82-16, 17 IIL13.3, 266-267 Fig. 193

824

N. 82-18, 19 Π1.12.3.4, 1Π.14.2.4, 265-268 Figs. 190, 193 N. 82-21 IIL 13.3, 267 Fig. 193 N. 83-AA, AB, AC TIL, 254 N. 83-AL IIL9.1,3, 256-257 Figs. 179-180 N. 83-AP, AQ, AY, RIIL7.3, 254 N. 83-BE IIL11.1-3, 263-264 Fig, 188 N.8-BG, BH, BI, BJ IILI024, V.42, V.63, 258-263, 414, 423, Figs. 181-188, 257, 304 N.83-BO, BP, BR, BS, BT IIL1114, 263-264 Fig, 188 N.8-H V.6, 423 Fig. 258 Cyrene A-B 142, V.42, 51.53, 414 Figs. 37-38, 44 Sarcophagus enclosures III.1.0, V.4.2, 241-242, 414 Figs. 165-166, 203 Upper Enclosure N. 81-B 111.163, 111.20.1-4, 270, 274-275 Figs. 195, 202 Lower Enclosure N. 81-B IIL21.1-4, V.4.2, V.623, 275-277, 414, 422-423 Figs. 202, 258, 391 N.81-AB IIL24.14, V.43, 280-281, 414 Figs. 206, 252, 304 N. 81-AN IIL 12.4, V5.3, 266, 419 Figs. 255, 388 N. 81-BB IIL.22.1-4, 277-278 Fig. 203 N. 8L-KK 111.23.1-4, 278-280 Fig. 203 N. 82-1 IIL124, IIL15.1-4, 266, 268-269 Fig. 193 N.8225 IILI23, 113.14, IV.15, V.8.14, 265-267, 349, 429, 431 Figs. 192-193, 262, 305 N. 82.24 Π1.1.3, IILI24, IILI4.14, 246, 265, 267-268 Fig. 193 N. 83-BK IILLOA, IIL10.14, IV.14, V.53, 241, 247-248, 258-263, 346, 420 Figs. 165-166, 181-186 N.83-S 1Π.1.3, 1115.1, IIL6.14, 246, 251-253 Fig. 179 N. 83-U IIL7.1-4, 253-254 Fig. 179 N.83-W TIL13-4, 1Π|9.1.4, 246-248, 256-257 Fig. 180 Sarcophagus group N.83-BN - BU IILIL14, V.42, 263-264, 414 Figs. 188, 305 Peripheral Group N. 81 N.81R, S, T, U, V 25.1.4, 281-282 Figs 204-206 Sarcophagus inscriptions VIL11.0-3, 524-525 Sarcophagus terraces IV.1.4, 345 Figs. 34-35 Sardis VI.2.3, 469 Fig. 280 Sarij-Ova VL2.3, 469 Fig. 280. Sattel-holz - see Block capital Screen 122, 132, 1133, 1153, 1172, 1133, W.103, V23, V6.1, VIL25, 3132, 43,

106-107, 118, 124, 250, 334, 342-344, 405-406, 421, 506 Figs. 9-10, 29, 43, 45, 66, 94, 101, 177, 220, 246, 289 Sculptured aedicula slab gravestones V.7.3, 426 Fig. 260 Sculptured heroic slab gravestones V.7.3, 425-426 Fig. 260 Sepulchre IV.1.0,7, 335, 354.355 Fig. 233 Shrine tomb 122, 1.523, IL6.14, V.1.0, VIL3.9, 32, 116, 118, 120-122, 398, 508 Figs. 37, 100, 107, 123, 292 Panelled orthostat shrine V.13, 400-401 Figs. 243-244 Smith and Porcher 123, 125, 13.1, 13.2, 34, 36, 38-45 Sockets VIL10.0-8, 516-522 Fig. 297 Spanu VI.2.2, 468 Fig. 279 Sparta VL33, 474 Fig. 286 Spelia V1.2, VL43, 467, 473 Fig. 285 Sphinx IV.1.1, 337 Fig. 212 Square chamber loculus - see Loculus Statuary13.1, IV.1.3, 38-39, 45, 343-344 Fig. 18 Statuary, stelai, gravestones and other furnishings V.5.0, 416-417 Figs. 253-255 Aniconic - Iconic Statuary V5.1, 417-418 Figs. 253-255 Naiskoi V5.2, 462-463 Fig. 254 Rock-cut sarcophagus statuary V5.3, 419-424 Fig. 255 Statue plinth IV.1.6, V.2.3, 350, 406 Figs. 220, 229 Stele Marble Antonianos 14.1, V.73, 47, 426 Fig. 36 Pillar 13.1, 13.2, 140, 1524,IV.1.67, V.23, V.6.1, 39, 42, 46, 114, 119, 351-353, 406, 420-421 Fig. 256 Block 144, 1.22, 11.94, 10.104, IV.134,

V.13, V.623, VL4.1, 47, 50, 103, 136, 262, 343, 347, 401, 422-423, 472 Figs. 36, 256-257, 285 Limestone

1.2.2, 142, 11.1.3, 32, 51, 55, 101-102 Figs. 8, 55,252,259 Block 11.2.1, IV.14, V.7.2, 103, 347, 425 Figs. 256-257, 259 Slab TILIOA, IIL13.1, 111212, V.6.2-3, 262, 266, 276, 422-423 Figs. 257, 391, 402 ‘Doryphoros’ V.1.3, 425 Fig, 260 Gladiator V1.1.1,463, Fig. 267 Stele monuments VII.9.1, 518-519 Figs. 51-56 Stepped stele base Π.1.3, TIL13.1-4, V.63, 101-102, 266-267, 423 Figs. 55, 258, 402

825

Stucchi, Prof. Sandro 122, 14.0, Π|4.1, 119.1, 3, 1L13.1, IV.0.1, IV.1.1-2, V3.1-2, VI42, 28, 46, 109, 129, 143, 336, 340, 408, 473 Subterranean peristyle tomb IV.1.0,2, 334, 342 Fig. 217 Syracuse VI5.2, 475 Taranto VL5.1, 474 Fig. 286 Tassoni, General 12.2, 123, 14.0, 14.1, 142, 11.6.1, 11.9.1, IIL1.1, 32, 35, 45, 120, 129, 245 Temple of Zeus 1.2.3, 11.8.4, 1110.1, IV.1.8, 34, 128, 136, 356 Temple precinct V.2.2, 405 Fig. 246 Temple tomb 12.1, 122, 123, 132, 115.14, 1V.0.0, IV.1.6, V.1.0, VIL3.10, 27, 32, 34, 42-43, 113-120, 328, 350, 397, 508 Figs. 2, 9, 27-28, 87, 95, 97, 99, 118, 121, 124, 198, 239-240, 243, 292 Double compartment V.1.1, 398399 Figs. 239-240 Tonic ixodomic-built V.1.4, 401-402 Fig. 243 ‘Theangela IV.1.2, VI.2.2, 341, 468 Fig. 279 Theisoa VI.4.4, 473 Fig. 286 Theke 12.2, 11.43, IV.12, 29, 111, 339 Figs. 215, 290, 298 Tipasa VL1.2, 467 Tocra Beechey's sketched tomb IV.1.6, VI.L.1, 350, 463 Fig. 268 Floor graves V1.1.1,464 Ossuaries V.8.2, VI.1.1, 431, 463 Fig. 268 Semitic burial practices V.82, VLLL, 430, 463 Fig. 268 Tolmeita Mausoleum VI.1.1, 463 Fig. 267 Oliverio's Tomb IV.1.6, V1.1.1, 350, 463 Fig. 267 ‘Tomb ofthe Kartilioi VL1.1, 463 Fig. 267 Tomlinson, Richard 12.5, 14.0, 119.1, 1112.1, 1V.0.1-2, IV.1.1,6-7, V.4.0, 36, 46, 129, 140, 330, 332, 337-338, 351354, 411 Triclinium/triclinium recess 13.2, IV.1.0,4, IV.1.67, IV.1.10, 44, 335, 347, 350, 354-355, 360 Figs. 28-29, 233, 235 Uhlenbrock, Jaimee 14.1, 47 Unporticoed chamber loculus - see Loculus Votive deposits V.8.4, 431 Fig. 262 Vourva VIA.1, 472 Fig. 285 Wadi bel Ghadir 12.1, 1.2.2, 123, 13.1, 13.2, 14.0, 14.1, IV.00, IV.1.1-3, 26, 28, 31, 34, 38-40, 46, 50, 327, 334, 336-338, 340-342 Figs. 24-25, 208, 210, 212, 217, 219, 226 Wadi bu Milio 1.11.1, 138 Wadi bu Turchia 1.2.1, 123, ILLI, IV.13, 24, 35, 100,342

Wadi el Aish IV.0.0, IV.1.5, V.73, V.8.1, 328, 348, 426, 427 Fig. 260 Wadi Haleg Shaloof 12.1, 13.2, 14.1, ILLO, IL4.1, IL5.1, 116.1, IILLL4, IV.00, 1V.1.13, V2.1, V.5.0, 24, 28, 39, 44, 49, 99, 108-109, 115, 120, 245-247, 328, 335, 337, 339-341, 403, 416 Figs. 20-23, 34-35, 67, 237 Wadi Halag Stawat 12.1, 13.1, IV.123, 26, 38, 339.341, 344 ‘Wadi Sneidi IL9.1, IV.1.7, 129, 353 Ward-Perkins, Major J.B. 1.2.4, 14.0, 35, 46 Warrington, Consul Hanmer 1.2.0, 13.0, V.7.3, 24, 36-37, 426 Fig, 260 George 12 , 13.0, V.4.0, 30, 37, 411 Frederick 13.0, 37 Weld-Blundell, Herbert 122, 12.4, 113.1, 3235, 105 Fig. 69 Wide chamber loculus - see Loculus Yenije IV.13, VL2.2, 343, 468 Fig. 279 Zawani Monument V.2.1, VI.1.1, 404, 465 Fig. 271 Tombs E.1V3.4,410 E.2 V.1.0,397 E. 16 V.1.0, V.2.0, 397, 402

E.19 = RowesM5 IL10.14, V.1.0.2, V4.1, V8.1, 136-138, 397-400, 413, 428 Figs. 138-144, 241, 304 E.201L10.1, 136 E. 24 IV.1.1, 336

E.47 V3.4, 410 Fig. 250 E.71V22,405 E. 72 V.2.0, 402-403 E. 75 IV.0.0, V.1.0-1, 328, 397, 399. E. 140 V.1.1, 399 Figs. 164, 240

E.160 = Rowe's E. 161-A IL10, 11.9.1-4, V.1.23, 99, 129-136, 399-400 Figs. 125-137 E. 161 11.1.0, IL9.1-4, V.1.2, V.3.2-4, V.5.2, 99, 129. 136, 400, 408-410, 418 Figs. 125-137, 250, 254, 301,321 E.174 = Rowe's M.4 IL10.1, IL11.1-4, V.3.3, 136, 138-139, 409 Figs. 145-149, 250 E. 180 IV.1.7, 353 Fig. 232

E.215 1V.17, 353 Fig. 232 E.235 V.43, 415 E. 244 V.22, 405

N. 1 "Tomba dei coniug? = Rowe's M5 1.4.0, 141, 115.14, V34, V.61, V8.1, 46, 49, 113-120, 410, 421, 428 Figs. 34, 81-98, 250 N. Lbis 1 1.5.1-4, V.1.1,4, V.22, 113-120, 398, 401, 405 Figs. 87, 89-90, 95, 97, 240

826

N. 1 bis 2 15.14, V.13, V23, V43, V52, 113-120, 400, 406, 415, 419 Figs. 81, 88, 95, 100, 243, 254 N. 2 122, 123, 114.14, IV.03, IV.1.1-2, V8.2, VIL12, 29, 34, 108-113, 332, 336, 339, 430, 504 Figs. 67, 76, 208-209, 262 N. 3 122, 123, 114.14, IV.1.12, V.82, VILI2, 29, 34, 108-113, 335-336, 339, 430, 504 Figs. 67, 76, 208-209 N. 4 122, 123, 141, 114.14, IV.12, V.82, VI5.2, VIL12, 29, 34, 108-113, 336, 339, 430, 465, 504 Figs. 67, 76, 78, 208-209, 262, 286, 288, 295 N. 51.2.2, 12.3, IL4.1-4, IV.1.1-2,9-10, VILLA, 29, 34, 108-113, 335, 340, 359-360, 503 Figs. 67, 75, 80, 208-209, 237, 290, 298 N. 6 122, 123, 114.14, IV.L1, VILL1, 29, 34, 108-113, 335, 503 Figs. 67, 75, 79, 208-209 N.7 122, 123, 13.2, 114.14, IV.1.1, VILLA, 29, 34, 39, 108-113, 335, 503 Figs. 67-69, 75, 79, 208-209 N. 8 122, 123, 132, 114.14, IV.112, V5.1, ΨΠ.1.3, 29, 34, 39, 108-113, 337-339, 417-418, 504 Figs. 67-69, 74, 79, 208-209, 212, 254 N. 912.2, 123, 13.2, IL4.1-4, 1V.03, IV.L.1, V7, VILLL, 29, 34, 39, 108-113, 332, 335, 337, 427, 503 Figs. 67-69, 74, 77, 79, 208-209 N. 10 121, 122, 113.1, IV.145, V.41, V8.1, 26-27, 29, 105, 107-108, 347, 349, 413, 427 Figs, 4,6, 61, 64-65, 227, 261, 298, 300 N. 11 103.1, IV.15, 105, 107-108, 349 Fig. 66 N. 12 113.1, 105, 107-108 Figs. 61-63 Copland Tomb 1.3.1, IV.1.4,6, 105-106, 108, 346, 350 Figs. 61, 223, 228 N. 13 = Rowe's M.16 113.1, IV.13, V4.1, V.8.1, VL4.4, 105-108, 343, 413, 471, 473 Figs. 61-64, 261 N. 14 11.2.1, V.1.3, 103, 401 Fig, 243 N. 17122, 132, 14.1, 1.1.4, IV.135,7,10, V5.1, V.7.12, 31, 40, 48-49, 102, 344-345, 349, 355, 361, 418, 424-425 Figs. 8, 34, 225, 237, 254, 259 N. 21 141, IV.134, V.211, V.6.1, V72, 50, 343, 346-347, 403, 421, 425 Figs. 36, 220, 225, 256, 259 N. 22 122, 13.2, 14.1, IV.0.0, IV.1.4,8, 2930, 41, 328, 345, 357 Figs. 8, 34, 235 N.2314.1,50 N. 24122, 14.1, V.82, 31, 50, 430 Figs. 8, 34, 222, 237 N. 25 1.2.2, 14.1, 31, 50 Figs. 8, 34, 222 N.27 V.15, 402 Fig. 243

N. 34 115.14, V.23, 113, 116, 118-120, 406 Figs. 92, 101, 103, 246 N. 36 1.2.2,13.2, IV.13,7, V2.1, V.73, 31, 42, 344, 355, 403, 427 Figs. 32, 36, 221, 261 N.37 IV.1.1, 336 N. 38 1.2.2, IIL14, IV.13,31, 287, 344 Figs. 9, 23, 221 N. 39 122, IV.1.3-4, V.23, 31, 344, 347, 406 Figs. 10, 23, 32, 221, 225, 246 N. 44 V5.0, 416 N. 52 122, 1154, IV.14, V.14, VLAA, 32, 119, 345, 401, 474 Figs. 9, 243, 286 N. 53 IV.1.4,8, V7.2, 345, 357, 424 Figs. 223, 235, 259 N. 54 vicinityV.5.3, 419 Fig, 255 N. 55 122, IV.1.7,10, V7.1, 32, 354, 424 Figs. 8, 232, 259, 405 N. 57 = Rowe's M8, 122, 142, IL6.1-4, V.LO13-4, V.43, 32, 52, 56, 120-122, 397-398, 401, 459 Figs. 37, 104-108, 243 N. 58 11.6.1-4, IV.1.3, 120-122, 343 Figs. 34, 106, 108, 219 N. 59 IL.6.1-4, IV.1.7, V.2.3, 120-122, 354, 406 Figs. 104, 106, 108, 232 N. 65 12.2, 1V.1.3-4,6-7, V.7.1, 32, 343, 346, 350, 355, 424 Figs. 9, 34, 219, 223 N. 66 12.2, 13.1, 13.2, 14.1, IV.1.9, 32, 39, 41, 359 Figs. 10, 45, 233 N. 6806.1, 121 N. 77 TILI9.14, V.1.0,4, V.22, 273-274, 398, 402, 405 Figs. 199-200,243 N. 81 IIL16.14, IV.1.10, 269-270, 360 Figs. 195, 237 N. 81 bis IIL16.1-4, 269-270 Fig. 195 N. 81-A IILI7.14, IV.127, 271-272, 341, 355 Figs. 198, 217 N. 81:0 TIL 181-4, 272-273 Figs. 198-201 N. 82 TIL12.1-4, IV.1.10, 264-266, 360-361 Figs. 189-191,237 N. 83 1.2.2, 13.2, 1124, IILL14, IV.13, IV.L80, V.8.2, 30, 41, 104, 245-248, 344, 358, 360-361, 430 Figs. 165, 170-174, 237, 291, 294 N. 83 bis IIL2.1-4, IV.1.4-5, 248-249, 347, 349 Figs. 166, 174, 179, 225 N. 83-BF 1113.1, 1V.03, 1V.13,5, V23, 271, 332, 344-345, 349, 406 Figs. 175-178, 222 N. 83-BF bis IIL4.144, IV.1.5, 250-251, 349 Figs. 175, 178, 228 N. 84 122, 142, IIL1.14, IV.19-10, 32, 56, 245, 248, 359, 361 Figs. 10, 45, 236

827

N. 86 132, IILLO, IV.13, 41, 241, 544 Figs. 27, 221 N. 87 IV.L7, V.12, V2.1, V.7.1, 354, 400, 404, 424 Fig. 245 N. 89 13.2, IILL0, IV.03, IV.1.7,9, 42, 241, 333, 355, 358 Figs. 28, 233, 236 N. 90-92 132, IIL1.O, IV.17, 42, 241, 352, 354 Figs. 28, 232 N.- 13.2, 43 Figs. 27, 223 N. 102 V.1.1, 398Fi N. 105 vicinity V.4.3, 415 Fig. 252 N. 108 IV.13,344 N. 119 V3.1.2, V.43, 408, 415 Fig. 249 N. 124 V4.4, 415 Fig. 252 N. 124 vicinity V.2.2, 405 Fig. 246 N. 125-126 V.13, V.4.5, 401, 415 Figs. 243, 252 N. 51132, 1V.03, 1V.13,6-7,9-10, V.1.2, 42, 333, 344, 351, 354, 359, 361, 400 Fig. 29, 228, 233, 238 N. 132 IV.1.8, V.12, 357, 400 Fig. 241 N. 132 vicinity V.2.2, 405 Fig. 246 N. 142 1.1247, V.14, 339, 345, 401 Figs. 223, 233 N. 145 V4.2, 414 Fig. 251 N. 149 IV.03, IV.13,6-7, V.5.1, 332, 343, 350, 355, 418 Figs. 228, 258 N. 150 IV.03, IV.1.6, 332, 350 Fig. 229 N. 165 12.2, 13.2, IV.1.6, IV.1.9-10, 32, 42-43, 350, 359-360 Figs. 30, 229, 236 N. 168 V.2.1, 404 N. 171 12.2, 14.0, 14.2, IV.1.6-7, V.6.1, 30, 46, 52, 350, 352, 354, 420-421 Figs. 9, 231, 256 N. 173 IV.1.4,7-10, V.7.3, 346, 354, 357, 359-360, 426 Figs. 224, 235, 261 N. 178 12.1, 12.2, 13.2, 14.2, 1V.13,5-6, V.23, 26, 32, 43, 51-55, 343, 348, 350, 405 Figs. 6, 10, 39, 45, 219, 246 N. 179 12. , 13.2, IV.13, V.23, 32, 43, 343, 405 Figs. 10, 219, 246 N. 180 12. , 14.0, IV.13, V2.1, 32, 46, 344, 403 Figs. 10,245 N. 181 TV.03, IV.145,10, V.7.3, 332, 346, 348, 361, 428 Figs. 226, 238, 262 N. 183 132, IV.13, V.23, V.42, V6.1, 43, 343, 406, 414, 421 Figs. 29, 220. N. 186-187 V.1.2, 400 Fig. 241 N. 191 V2.1, V.7.1, 408, 424 Fig. 245 N. 192 142, IV.03, IV.1.35,10, V.7.1, 53-57, 332, 342, 349, 361, 424 Figs. 37, 42, 46, 228, 238, 259 N. 196 12.2, 1.23, 14.0, 1.42, IV.13-4,10, V2. 32, 35, 46, 51-52, 55-56, 343, 346, 360, 405 Figs. 15-16, 43, 45, 220, 238, 246

N. 197 = Rowe’s M3 142, 11.1.0, IL7.1-4, IV.13, V.23, V8.1, 52, 99, 122-126, 343, 406, 428 Figs. 109, 116, 246, 300 N. - = Rowe's N. 198A ILLO, 11724, V4.1, V.84, 100, 124-126, 413, 431 Figs. 109, 113-114, 262 N. 198 = Rowe'sN. 198B IL73-4, IV.1.3, 125-126, 343 Figs. 115-116,221 N. 201 = Rowe's M.6 14.1, 11.64, IL8.14, V.13, 50, 122, 126-128, 401 Figs. 118-120, 123 N. 202 = Rowe's M2 1.2.2, 14.1, IL8.1-4, V.1.0-2, V.45, 33, 50, 126-128, 397-400, 415 Figs. 118, 121-122, 124, 239 N. 203 123, 14.1, 37, 52 Figs. 118 N. 204 L4.1, V.1.1, 50, 398 Fig. 118 N. 205 1.4.1, 50 Fig. 118 N. 206 14.1, V.1.0, V.2.2, V.43, 50, 397, 404, 415 Figs. 118, 246 N. 207 14.1, 50 Fig. 118 N. 208 14.1, V.1.0,4, V4.4, 50, 397, 401-402, 415 Figs. 118, 243 N. 209 IV.13, 344 Fig. 222 N. 216 vicinity V.4.4, 415 Fig. 252 N. 224 13.2, IV.03, IV.13, V.4.1, V8.1, 43, 332, 342, 413, 428 Figs. 29, 219, 262 N. 225 13.2, IV.1.3,5, 43, 342, 349 Fig. 29, 219 N. 226 13.2, IV.14,8,10,41, 346, 358, 360 Figs. 27, 224,237 N. 228 13.2, IV.13-4, V.7.1, 44, 343, 346, 424 Figs. 224,259 N. 229 IV.14-5, 346, 392 N. 236 122, 132, IV.L7, V.73, 33, 41, 355, 427 Figs. 27, 233 N. 240 vicinity V.6.2, 422 Fig. 257 N. 241 = Rowe's M7, 12.1, 122, 14.1, 12.14, IV.1,9-10, 27, 29, 48, 103-105, 359-360 Figs. 4, 6, 34, 57, 60, 237, 299 N. 245 V.2.1, 404 Fig. 245 N. 252 V.43, 415 N. 258 132, IILLO, 1V.13-47-8, V5.1, V.61, V.8.1, 44, 241, 344, 346, 355, 358, 418 Figs. 28, 225, 233, 235, 254, 256 N. 259 13.2, IV.1.8, 44, 358 Figs. 28, 235 N. 270 14.1, 1.2.4, IV.1.10, 47, 50, 104-105, 360 Figs. 57, 237 N. 274 IV.1.4, 345 Fig. 223 N. 274 vicinity IV.1.2,4, 339, 345 Fig. 223 N.276132,43 Fig.28 N. 276 vicinity IV.1.2, V.4.2, 339, 414 Fig. 28 N. 286IV.13, 342 N. 287 12.3, 35 N. 293 vicinity IV.1.4, 345 Fig. 27

828

N. 354 vicinityV.4.2, V.63, 414, 423 Fig. 258 N. 357 IV.03, IV.145, V5.3, 332, 346, 348, 420 Figs. 224, 226 N. 364 IV.03, IV.1.7,10, 332, 355, 361 Figs. 234, 238 N. 365 IV.1.4,7, 345, 355 Fig, 223 N. 368-369 V.1.1, 398 Fig, 239 N. 370 vicinity V.L1, V.42, V.53, 398, 414, 419 Figs. 246, 255, 258 N. 380 = Rowe's M.18 ILL2, V.7.1, 101, 424 Figs. 55, 259 N. 381 monuments 1-2 IL13, 101-102 Fig. 51 N. 382 1.15, 113-114 Fig. 52 N. 383 monument 1 = Rowe's M.19 IL13-4, 113-114 Fig. 56 N. 383 monument 3 = Rowe's M.17 ILLL, V2.1, 101, 404 Figs. 56, 245 N. 383 monument 4 = Rowe's M.1 ILL, 101 Fig. 56 N. 384 vicinity V.4.5, 416 Fig. 252 N. 385 14.1, IV.1.2, 49, 340 N. 386-396 IV.1.2, 340 N. 39812.0, 1.2.2, 13.2, IV.1.8, 23, 28-29, 356 Figs. 7-8, 234 N. 401 142, 115.13, IV.03, IV.145, V8.1, 55, 113, 116, 118, 332, 346, 348, 428 Figs. 91-92, 101, 103, 224, 226, 300 N. 405 IV.1.1-2, 336, 340 Figs. 210, 215 N. 405 group IV.1.2,339 Fig. 215 Tomb of the Aniconic Niches IV.1.2, 341.342 Fig. 215 N. 407 IV.1.2, 341 Fig. 215 N. 410 V8.1, 428 N.415 IV.1.10, 360 N. 416 IIL1.0-1, IV.1.9, 242, 245, 359 Fig. 210 N. - 122,3233 N. - 13.2, 43 Figs. 30, 228, 243 N. - 132, 43 Figs. 27, 239 Blundell Tomb D IV.1.1, V.22, 336, 405 Figs. 16, 210211 Stappard Tomb IV.0.0,3, IV.1.9-10, 327, 333, 358 Fig. 235 Tomb of the Butcher IV.1.2, 342 Fig. 217 Porcher Watercolour 90 IV.18,10, V.8.2, 358, 360-361,430 Fig. 30 Porcher Watercolour 91 IV.L5,10, 348349, 361 Figs. 226, 238 Porcher Watercolour 92 IV.1.4, 346 Fig. 224 Porcher Watercolours 93, 97 IV.1.6, V.8.1, 351, 428 Figs. 30, 230, 233 Porcher Watercolour 94 IV.1.6, V.1.4, V.23, 349, 401, 406 Figs. 228, 243

Porcher Watercolour 96 IV.1.4, 347 Fig. 224 Porcher Watercolour 101 IV.1.4, 345 Porcher Watercolour 120 TV.1.8,10, V.82, 357, 360-361, 430 Fig. 235 Porcher Watercolour 121 IV.1.8, 358 Fig. 235 Porcher Watercolour 122 IV.1.8, 358 Fig. 235 S. 11V.16,0, V.8.1,4, 351, 361, 428, 431 Figs. 230, 238 8.2 V.1.5, 402 Fig, 243 S. 4 13.1, 132, IV.167, V.6.1, 39, 42, 351, 353, 420-421 Fig. 256 8.912.1, IV.16, 27, 351 Fig. 230 S. 10122, 33 8.141194, 136 5.21 V.12, 400 $.51V5.1,418 8.54 V.8.1, 429 S. 64 IV.1.6-8, V.2.3, 350, 355, 357, 406 Fig. 228 S. 66 IV.L7, V.23, V.8.1, 354, 406, 428 Figs. 232, 246 8. 68-69 vicinity V.43, 415 Fig. 252 S. 69 IV.1.1, V7.3, V.8.1, 336, 427-428 Figs. 210, 261 8.74 122, IV.1.6, V.23, 33, 350, 406 Figs. 11, 228, 246 8. 77 = Rowe's M.14 1113.14, V3.2, V4.1, 143145, 409, 413 Figs. 158-163, 249, 304 .78 V3.4, 410-411 80 = Rowe's M.9 IL12.14, V3.2, 140-142, 408 Figs. 150-152, 247, 249 S. 80 bis 11.12.14, V.1.1, V5.2, 140-142, 398, 418 Figs. 150, 157, 254 8.81 = Rowe's M.10 Π.12.1-4, 140-142 Figs. 150, 153-154,301 8.82 = Rowe's M.11 IL12.1-4, 140-142 Fig. 150 5.83 = Rowe's M.12 Π.12.1.4, 140-142 Figs. 150, 155 S. 84 = Rowe's M.13 IL12.1-4, 140-142 Figs. 150, 156 5.85 IL12.1-4, V3.3, 140-142,409 Fig. 150 S. 185 12.1, 11.64, V.1.0-1, 27, 122, 397, 399 Fig. 240 S. 186 13.2, 42 Figs. 28, 240 8.195 IV.1.2, V5.1, V.8.1, 341, 417, 428 Figs. 217, 253 S. 201 IV.1.7, 352, 354 Fig. 231 S. 218-219 vicinity V.3.1, 408 Fig. 247 8.227 1V.1.3, V.23, 345, 406 Fig. 246 5.235 V.3.2, 408 Fig. 249. 5.236 V.3.1, 408 Fig. 247 8.24 V.3.1, 408 Fig. 247

829

8.250 vicinity V.3.2, 408-409 8.253 V3.2, 409 Fig. 249 8.256 V.3.1, 408 Fig. 247 8.279 V.2.2, 405 8.284 V.43, 415 8.359 IV.1.9-10, 359 Figs. 207, 236 S. 388 IV.1.4,7, 346, 352-354 Fig. 232 S.-12.2,33 Fig. 30 S.- 12.2, 33 Fig. 227 "Tomba nel Giardino’ IV 1.10, 361 Fig. 238 Tomb of Thanatos IV.1.2, 342 Fig. 217 W. 2-6 1V.1.2, 339-340 W. 7 1V.12, 339-340 Fig. 214 W. 81V.1.2, 339 W. 9-14 IV.12, 339 W. 15 IV.1.1-2,5, 336-338, 348 Fig. 208 W. 16 12.1, 13.2, 14.1, IV.125, 26, 42, 50, 338, 348 Figs. 4, 226 V. 17 1V.1.1.2,5, 338, 348 Fig. 210 W. 18 12.1, 122, IV.1.1-2,5, 27, 30, 338, 348 Figs. 4,7, 212 W. 19 1V.1.2, 338 W. 20 12.1, 122, 13.2, IV.1.1-2, 4-5, 26, 30, 44, 338, 346, 348 Figs. 4-5, 226 W, 211V.12, 340-341 Fig. 217 W. 22 IV.1.1-2, V5.1, 338-339, 341, 418 Figs. 214, 254 W. 23 IV.1.2, 339 W. 24 IV.1.2, 339.340 Fig. 215 W. 25 IV.12, 339-340 Fig. 215 W. 2613.2, 40 Figs. 24, 215 W. 27 12.2, 13.2, 14.1, 30, 40, 50, 384 Figs. 11, 24, 215 W. 28 12.2, 13.2, 1.4.1, IV.1.2, 30, 40, 50, 339.340 Figs. 11, 24, 214-215 W. 29 12.2, 13.2, 14.1, IV.12, 30, 40, 50, 339-340 Figs. 11, 24, 215 W.30 122, 13.2, 1.4.1, IV.12, 30, 40, 50, 339 Figs 1M, 24, 215

W. 31122, 14.1, IV.1.2, 30, 50, 339341 igs. 11, 215 W. 32 IV.1.2, 339 Fig. 217 W.33 13.2, IV.1.1-2, 40, 336-339 Figs. 25, 210 W. 37 IV.1.1-2, 336337, 341 Fig. 210 W. 38.39 1V.1.2, 339 W. 41 123, IV.11,10, 36, 336, 361 Figs. 13, 16, 210, 238 W. 44 IV.1.1.2, 336, 339 Fig. 208 W. 47 1V.1.1,337 W. 48 12.2, 123, 13.2, 14.1, 1.1.12, 33-34, 40, 50, 337-339 Figs. 11, 26, 212 W. 4913.2, IV.1.1-2, 40, 337, 339 Fig. 210 W. 5013.2,40 W. 52 IV.1.7, 356 W. 80 1V.1.5, V.8.1, 347-348, 430 Fig. 225 W. 85 V.73, 427 Fig. 261 W. 100123, 34 W. 103 12.3, 3435 W. 1041.23,V.1.1, 3435, 398. W. 107 Tomb of Grenna 12.1, 12.2, 13.1, IV.03, 1V.18, IV.1.9, 25, 31, 38, 333, 356, 358 Figs. 11, 234 W. 112-113 IV.13, V.7.2, 344, 424 Fig. 259 W. 114 IV.13, 344 Fig, 259. W. 115 1V.13, V5.3, 344, 464 W. 132 V.8.1, 428 Fig. 261 W. 151 1V.1.2, 340 W. 152 1.12, V.5.12, 341, 417, 419 Figs. 217, 253 W. 156-157 V.1.0, 397 Said Faraj Tomb A IV.13,5-6, V8.1, 344345, 349.350, 429 Figs. 227-229, 262 Said Faraj Tomb B IV.1.4, 347 Fig. 224 Tomb of Abdul Rheem IV.12, V.5.1, VI24, 341, 417, 469 Fig. 253 Tomb of Altalena (Tomb of the Swing) 1.2.1, 12.2, 13.1, 13.2, IV.1.5, 26, 31, 38, 42, 348 Figs. 4-5, 7, 18, 226